Surface Pro 64GB model only has 23GB of usable storage

[mobilehaathi]

Yeesh, I wouldn't be able to advertise that with a straight face, but then again I'm not a businessman.

[jav6454]

Originally Posted by jeremiah256

You bring up a good point: It can be argued that for both Google and Apple, their mobile OS is more or becoming more important than their desktop OS. Microsoft seems to be coming from the opposite direction. This hasn't worked out well for them in the past and I'm not sure they have much time to adapt. Especially with how Samsung, the face of Android, is exploding.

It is all about tablet efficiency. Apple and Google made a good job at giving the customer what they advertised (32GB is very close to 32GB). In this case, it is thanks to their custom tailored OS.

Yes, Microsoft is pushing Windows, but pushing it from the desktop (and all its legacy) on to a tablet is a no-no. Windows has to be rebuilt, much like Windows Phone was rebuilt from Windows Mobile. That will make the OS leaner and much more adept for the competitive mobile OS market.

[MuffCabbage]

Originally Posted by jav6454

It is all about tablet efficiency. Apple and Google made a good job at giving the customer what they advertised (32GB is very close to 32GB). In this case, it is thanks to their custom tailored OS.

Yes, Microsoft is pushing Windows, but pushing it from the desktop (and all its legacy) on to a tablet is a no-no. Windows has to be rebuilt, much like Windows Phone was rebuilt from Windows Mobile. That will make the OS leaner and much more adept for the competitive mobile OS market.

Windows Phone 8 is built from Windows 8. It seems to take up about 4GB.

[jav6454]

Originally Posted by MuffCabbage

Windows Phone 8 is built from Windows 8. It seems to take up about 4GB.

No... Windows Phone was built first. Metro was ported from Windows Phone to the desktop.

[MuffCabbage]

Originally Posted by jav6454

No... Windows Phone was built first. Metro was ported from Windows Phone to the desktop.

Windows Phone 8 is built on the Windows kernel is what I was saying. We're apparently talking about different things since I know you know this stuff (Windows 8 using similar Metro UI as WP has nothing to do with slimming an OS obviously)

"Windows Phone 8 replaces its previously Windows CE-based architecture with one based on the Windows NT kernel with many components shared with Windows 8, allowing applications to be easily ported between the two platforms."

My point is Windows is capable of being slimmed down for mobile devices without a rewrite. Windows 8 already runs well on an Atom processor with 2GB RAM giving 8-9 hours battery on our Samsung Ativ Smart PC. Windows RT runs well on a Tegra 3.

Sure they could improve it like they are consistently doing, but I dont think it needs a rewrite. In time the old will be phased out and the new will replace it.

[jav6454]

Originally Posted by MuffCabbage

Windows Phone 8 is built on the Windows kernel is what I was saying. We're apparently talking about different things since I know you know this stuff (Windows 8 using similar Metro UI as WP has nothing to do with slimming an OS obviously)

"Windows Phone 8 replaces its previously Windows CE-based architecture with one based on the Windows NT kernel with many components shared with Windows 8, allowing applications to be easily ported between the two platforms."

My point is Windows is capable of being slimmed down for mobile devices without a rewrite. Windows 8 already runs well on an Atom processor with 2GB RAM giving 8-9 hours battery on our Samsung Ativ Smart PC. Windows RT runs well on a Tegra 3.

Sure they could improve it like they are consistently doing, but I dont think it needs a rewrite. In time the old will be phased out and the new will replace it.

True, true and true. For me, it requires a rewrite. Apple and Google didn't say "oh you know what, rewrite is too costly and time consuming, lets just bloat a bit the OS to put in the mobile space."

That is what Microsoft did, they simply took full blown Windows and wrote in some code lines to make it work. End result? A bloated OS...

[spinedoc77]

This is such a non issue that's being blown out of proportion by sites erroneously comparing the pro to an ipad, as if this is the first desktop or laptop that windows ever released. 128gb isn't 128gb, it's something like 119gb, 64gb is something like 59gb. Take 10 or so gb for the recovery partition which you can delete and/or transfer to a thumb drive, and I'm guessing maybe another 8gb or so for the office trial and you can see its no more of a big deal than on any other windows laptop or desktop you purchase.

I do agree that MS should have included the recovery on a thumb drive, but then again even Apple stopped doing this.

[SlCKB0Y]

Originally Posted by Fernandez21

41 gb is a lot. Windows 7 on my MacBook takes up only 24gb. Is windows 8 that bloated?

Only? I just did a clean install of Mountain Lion and the OS was taking up 6.5GB. Microsoft is so far out of touch with reality at the moment it's not funny.

----------

Originally Posted by spinedoc77

This is such a non issue that's being blown out of proportion by sites erroneously comparing the pro to an ipad, as if this is the first desktop or laptop that windows ever released.

It's not overblown at all. What Microsoft is doing is nuts but based on your previous replies regarding them, I wouldn't dream of expecting you to see that.

The fact remains that Windows is the most bloated OS that has ever been made available to consumers by a massive margin.

[spinedoc77]

Originally Posted by SlCKB0Y

Only? I just did a clean install of Mountain Lion and the OS was taking up 6.5GB. Microsoft is so far out of touch with reality at the moment it's not funny.

----------



It's not overblown at all. What Microsoft is doing is nuts but based on your previous replies regarding them, I wouldn't dream of expecting you to see that.

The fact remains that Windows is the most bloated OS that has ever been made available to consumers by a massive margin.

Sure it's bloated, but that didn't happen yesterday. That's why I fail to understand what the big deal is, we've had the same issue for as long as windows has been an OS. It's also not 23gb left over, but more like 47gb roughly when you factor in the true size of a hard drive (1000 vs 1024) , factor in the recovery and the office trial. It's inane comparisons to the ipad that drive this.

I am not denying that windows isn't bloated, or that MS shouldn't have anticipated this level of stupidity in the media, but it doesn't take much thought or math to see its overblown.

Oh wait, I also forgot to mention you can add 64gb memory with a microSD card, of course we shouldn't mention the iPads complete lack of external storage as they are different devices meant for different uses, oh wait no external storage is a revolutionary "feature".

[Renzatic]

On my comp, Win8 x64 takes up 17GB.

I think the biggest problem is MS forces a restore partition on you with all their tablets. What they should be doing instead is offering you a USB key with Win8 on it, so you'll have that much extra storage space to use for all your programs and files, instead of being perpetually taken up by a clone of the OS you may only have to use once every other year or so.

[spinedoc77]

Just for comparison my wife's 64gb macbook air starts at 59gb, mountain Lion takes about 11gb of space putting it at 48gb, fairly close to my estimate of 47ish gb on a windows install, although I'm only guesstimating as I don't have the pro in front of me.

[b166er]

I always thought it was crazy that there are no regulations regarding how that stuff is advertised. I have to assume most people just don't understand how it works. I think that devices should be advertised with the amount of usable space you will have out of the box, but the term "usable space" would likely confuse a lot of people. If 5 GB must be taken up out of the box do to software that's cool but companies should have to make that clear. I know some companies put it in the fine print.

[iHailCarlo]

It's windows what did you expect. It's a bloated resource pig. No efficiency whatsoever!!

[Xiroteus]

Originally Posted by b166er

I always thought it was crazy that there are no regulations regarding how that stuff is advertised. I have to assume most people just don't understand how it works. I think that devices should be advertised with the amount of usable space you will have out of the box, but the term "usable space" would likely confuse a lot of people. If 5 GB must be taken up out of the box do to software that's cool but companies should have to make that clear. I know some companies put it in the fine print.

It is misleading, along with the way space is done, 640GB means 596GB etc.. then say what it is. The same should go for a device, people want to know what they can use, saying something had 128GB of storage yet 100GB is used by the system would not mean much.

[jmgregory1]

MS should be embarrassed by this. It's one thing to have a huge OS when you can hide it on a 500gb or bigger hdd, but when you're dealing with an ultra portable device that uses flash memory (at a significantly higher cost) and lower storage capacity, there is a reason why they should have re-thought their all in one OS decision.

Sure, people can add a usb drive or memory card to get more storage capacity, but losing half your stated drive capacity (without purposely making changes to address the loss) is just bad business and bad decision making. MS should have done what Apple did years ago and piss off their broad user base by forcing change so that they don't have to keep building the OS to work with the lowest common denominator software and hardware. They were chicken to do so and they're going to keep paying for that decision until they finally make this change.

[Xiroteus]

Originally Posted by jmgregory1

Sure, people can add a usb drive or memory card to get more storage capacity, but losing half your stated drive capacity (without purposely making changes to address the loss) is just bad business and bad decision making. MS should have done what Apple did years ago and piss off their broad user base by forcing change so that they don't have to keep building the OS to work with the lowest common denominator software and hardware. They were chicken to do so and they're going to keep paying for that decision until they finally make this change.

One issue with forcing change is they end up living so far in the future it makes it difficult to use in the present. It is a poor move to only have 23GB out of 64GB, really bad. I also feel the same way about products that like like something is dead because they say it is when it is not a fact. I like the concept of this tablet IF done correctly, the RT seems like a mess from what I have seen, I would pick an iPad long before the Surface RT, the Pro is another story.

How should Microsoft make a tablet that can run what people want?

[spinedoc77]

Originally Posted by Xiroteus

One issue with forcing change is they end up living so far in the future it makes it difficult to use in the present. It is a poor move to only have 23GB out of 64GB, really bad. I also feel the same way about products that like like something is dead because they say it is when it is not a fact. I like the concept of this tablet IF done correctly, the RT seems like a mess from what I have seen, I would pick an iPad long before the Surface RT, the Pro is another story.

How should Microsoft make a tablet that can run what people want?

Yeah RT is really a huge failure, just some serious lack of foresight and a complete lack of cohesion inside of MS and not understanding the market IMO. I agree that the Pro hard drive space, while grossly exaggerated and misunderstood by tech people who look utterly stupid by not being able to do simple math, does pose a roadblock to your average non tech grandma user who will not know to remove the recovery partition for example. MS should have just simply made an OS recovery available online like Apple does, but I'll bet they want too much control and fear piracy too much to do that. In light of that they should have just put in a USB thumbdrive like Apple used to do.

It's all about marketing in the end.

[Xiroteus]

Originally Posted by spinedoc77

Yeah RT is really a huge failure, just some serious lack of foresight and a complete lack of cohesion inside of MS and not understanding the market IMO. I agree that the Pro hard drive space, while grossly exaggerated and misunderstood by tech people who look utterly stupid by not being able to do simple math, does pose a roadblock to your average non tech grandma user who will not know to remove the recovery partition for example. MS should have just simply made an OS recovery available online like Apple does, but I'll bet they want too much control and fear piracy too much to do that. In light of that they should have just put in a USB thumbdrive like Apple used to do.

It's all about marketing in the end.

I really like Windows, however if a device cannot do everything like lets say Windows 7 then it really is of little use to me personally, I would rather purchase an iPad and be able to more then an RT surface, when it comes to a Windows tablet it has to be a full OS to get the right function out of it.

I imagine a lot of people will want to delete recovery partitions, shrink restore points etc.. those are just too large for a 64GB device. They need it online along with an opinion for a USB drive.

[jmgregory1]

My 128gb 13" air only uses ~7 total gb's of space for the OS AND iWork and iLife out of the gate. It's not 119gb of free space to start, then you start taking into account the OS and other applications. My 32gb iPad includes 3gb of OS overhead, so the actual usable space is 29gb.

Percentage-wise, it looks really bad for MS, regardless of whether you're comparing it to iOS or OSX - that is without cleaning things up and changing the system. You can do the same thing in OSX by removing languages and a few other non-essential things.

For MS, I know a big portion of the bloat is related to their having to maintain a system that works for all the legacy programs they tout their system as being able to run.

[jmgregory1]

Originally Posted by Xiroteus

One issue with forcing change is they end up living so far in the future it makes it difficult to use in the present. It is a poor move to only have 23GB out of 64GB, really bad. I also feel the same way about products that like like something is dead because they say it is when it is not a fact. I like the concept of this tablet IF done correctly, the RT seems like a mess from what I have seen, I would pick an iPad long before the Surface RT, the Pro is another story.

How should Microsoft make a tablet that can run what people want?

I understand the limitations MS has to deal with in regards to keeping their user base happy. I wouldn't want to be in their position - because they are screwed by having to make an OS work backwards for just so they don't make a bunch of their customers mad. I would bet that there were people, are people, within MS that pushed to drop the legacy support for outdated software and hardware, but I can hear those that shut down that thinking saying "so you're willing to fall on your sword when we get hate mail from 50 million now former customers?"

Apple had the benefit, at the time they made the switch from PPC to Intel and the software switch that was forced by this change, of not having a very big user base - so they could take the hit, hoping that they had more upside to the switch than downside - which of course was true.

[Xiroteus]

Originally Posted by jmgregory1

I understand the limitations MS has to deal with in regards to keeping their user base happy. I wouldn't want to be in their position - because they are screwed by having to make an OS work backwards for just so they don't make a bunch of their customers mad. I would bet that there were people, are people, within MS that pushed to drop the legacy support for outdated software and hardware, but I can hear those that shut down that thinking saying "so you're willing to fall on your sword when we get hate mail from 50 million now former customers?"

I am not quite sure how much this even covers, how old is legacy software and hardware right now. There needs to be a middle ground, living too far in the future means you effect what people want and are using in the present while living too far in the past (legitimate dated hardware, software) may mean a bloated system today.

There will always be people that will never want to move on to other things, if we wanted for everyone to be ready we could still be dealing with horrible VHS (random example) When someone is still using an OS that is thirteen years old they may have issues with moving on. I remember someone saying they had an issue with Windows 7 because it would not work with their scanner from 1998. Kind of old, not everything can run forever no matter if it still works fine.

Not sure what Microsoft can do, when it comes to Windows based PC the underbase goes from new software hardware to extremely dated programs, sometimes in the business world as well.

Even having 23GB left from a 32GB model is not that great, let alone the 64GB model. I wonder how much can be deleted, think people could get it down to 20GB of used space or so.

[adder7712]

41GB seems a bit absurd.

Windows 8 doesn't take more space than Windows 7 on my machine.

[jmgregory1]

Originally Posted by Xiroteus

I am not quite sure how much this even covers, how old is legacy software and hardware right now. There needs to be a middle ground, living too far in the future means you effect what people want and are using in the present while living too far in the past (legitimate dated hardware, software) may mean a bloated system today.

There will always be people that will never want to move on to other things, if we wanted for everyone to be ready we could still be dealing with horrible VHS (random example) When someone is still using an OS that is thirteen years old they may have issues with moving on. I remember someone saying they had an issue with Windows 7 because it would not work with their scanner from 1998. Kind of old, not everything can run forever no matter if it still works fine.

Not sure what Microsoft can do, when it comes to Windows based PC the underbase goes from new software hardware to extremely dated programs, sometimes in the business world as well.

Even having 23GB left from a 32GB model is not that great, let alone the 64GB model. I wonder how much can be deleted, think people could get it down to 20GB of used space or so.

You're preaching to the choir, brother Xiroteus. It's not just consumers and corporate IT guys causing the problem for MS - it goes all the way to the business model that many software companies use (or have used). It's tough to get all these moving parts to move as a single unit - which is what MS is dealing with.

They can't get corporate IT guys to change if the software they're using requires a costly update, further compounded by the cost of the update that MS then charges.

Even if the software companies update their software to take advantage of new code, if that update doesn't get enough uptake into the market (because of cost or the need for new hardware), then there is no leverage from the software side to change either. And yes, there are millions of consumers still using decade's old hardware and software because it still works and they are unwilling to change for change's sake (even if it's more than that, they're happy working on slow, inefficient hardware and software.

Not that MS isn't faultless here - they too have for years overcharged for just about everything - and now they too are caught in a market where you can get competing product that works like MS products for free or significantly less than what MS charges.

I think MS needs to fully change their entire business model if they want to survive long term. It might sound drastic, but the same thing is happening in other industries where the once mighty leaders have ended up withering away because they didn't change.

[Michael Goff]

Originally Posted by adder7712

41GB seems a bit absurd.

Windows 8 doesn't take more space than Windows 7 on my machine.

But do you have about 7 or so GB for a recovery partition and a trial for Office?

[spinedoc77]

Can't say I disagree with the complaints about how MS marketed their free space, but 48gb out of 64gb isn't the end of the world for me, it's virtually the same as my wife's 64gb Macbook air, well I'm getting the 128gb version so that's much better. If anything I'll enjoy the freedom the microSD card, USB 3.0 port, display port, etc give me.