iPad Pro blows in many respects. I just sent this to apple feature request

[dk001]

Well, for Apple's decision to be in any way impacted by a product (to play on its success, as you said), it would have to be successful on the market.

So, yes, not only did I assume you were talking about sales, it was the only metric that could apply in this discussion. But now I realized what you actually said was

"IPP is a gasp from Apple (IMHO) because I think Surface Pro is nice."

So, let me respond with - nope, they weren't playing on anything, they made the thing because they saw an opportunity to earn money and they payed no attention to the Surface. Not sure how this qualifies me for Appleland, unless it's a land of good reasoning.
...?

One more time... Apple launched the iPad Pro due to the design change that Microsoft introduced into the market (tablet as a laptop, design driving change ), TC even played it as a replacement, and in an effort to firm up lagging iPad sales (Apple, CNBC, WS, NYT, etc...).

 

[aevan]

One more time... Apple launched the iPad Pro due to the design change that Microsoft introduced into the market (tablet as a laptop, design driving change ), TC even played it as a replacement, and in an effort to firm up lagging iPad sales (Apple, CNBC, WS, NYT, etc...).

One more time... No. No, they didn't.

They did make changes in an effort to firm up iPad sales, but you're wrong on two accounts

1. They didn't do it because Microsoft introduced the anything

2. Microsoft didn't introduce a tablet as a laptop replacement, the first hybrid tablet with a detachable keyboard was the Compaq TC1000 way back in 2002, a whole decade before the Surface. And there were plenty attempts after that one as well. Just as Apple didn't invent the tablet with the iPad, Microsoft didn't invent the hybrid tablet with the Surface. Also, there were several keyboard covers for the iPad before Surface was announced, so one could even argue Microsoft launched the Surface due to the design change Apple introduced to the market (which would explain why, at first, they marketed the Surface against the iPad, and not the MacBook as they do now. In fact, the reason why the Surface came with a keyboard and trackpad was because Windows was - and still is - unoptimized for touch-only use, and people wanted tablets because of iPads.)

I'm not an expert by any means, but the way I understand it - Microsoft made the Surface for strategic reasons - to integrate Windows with their own hardware, push their hardware partners into making premium devices and drive Windows sales. And Apple made the iPad Pro to try and shift the iPad towards the content creators, not just consumers. Both devices happen to have keyboard covers. They also have touchscreens and styluses.

Once again, the Surface is a great tablet, a great laptop and a great device, but I am fairly certain that we would have the same iPad Pro we have today (for better or worse), even if Microsoft didn't introduce the "design driving change" you consider the Surface to be. Both devices exist today because the world wants new form factors and new devices but refuses to bury the old ones at the same time.

 

[dk001]

One more time... No. No, they didn't.

They did make changes in an effort to firm up iPad sales, but you're wrong on two accounts

1. They didn't do it because Microsoft introduced the anything

2. Microsoft didn't introduce a tablet as a laptop replacement, the first hybrid tablet with a detachable keyboard was the Compaq TC1000 way back in 2002, a whole decade before the Surface. And there were plenty attempts after that one as well. Just as Apple didn't invent the tablet with the iPad, Microsoft didn't invent the hybrid tablet with the Surface. Also, there were several keyboard covers for the iPad before Surface was announced, so one could even argue Microsoft launched the Surface due to the design change Apple introduced to the market (which would explain why, at first, they marketed the Surface against the iPad, and not the MacBook as they do now. In fact, the reason why the Surface came with a keyboard and trackpad was because Windows was - and still is - unoptimized for touch-only use, and people wanted tablets because of iPads.)

I'm not an expert by any means, but the way I understand it - Microsoft made the Surface for strategic reasons - to integrate Windows with their own hardware, push their hardware partners into making premium devices and drive Windows sales. And Apple made the iPad Pro to try and shift the iPad towards the content creators, not just consumers. Both devices happen to have keyboard covers. They also have touchscreens and styluses.

Once again, the Surface is a great tablet, a great laptop and a great device, but I am fairly certain that we would have the same iPad Pro we have today (for better or worse), even if Microsoft didn't introduce the "design driving change" you consider the Surface to be. Both devices exist today because the world wants new form factors and new devices but refuses to bury the old ones at the same time.

Sigh... I never said MS did it as a laptop replacement. MS created the Surface for two-fold: 1 - strategic reason - you are correct, 2 - as the showcase platform for the Win-8 concept and the all in one for everything OS.

I'm glad you are certain about the iPad Pro. Very few are and no matter how you tweak your view; it is based on the Surface model. Either way, two designs are driving change: The Thin is in MBA concept and the Surface tablet as a laptop concept.

 

[Michael Goff]

Sigh... I never said MS did it as a laptop replacement. MS created the Surface for two-fold: 1 - strategic reason - you are correct, 2 - as the showcase platform for the Win-8 concept and the all in one for everything OS.

I'm glad you are certain about the iPad Pro. Very few are and no matter how you tweak your view; it is based on the Surface model. Either way, two designs are driving change: The Thin is in MBA concept and the Surface tablet as a laptop concept.

No, the Pro is not based on the Surface. One is a laptop in tablet form and the other is a giant tablet. iPads have had keyboards and keyboard cases for a while. They started before the Surface was even announced.

 

[Night Spring]

I would say there is a considerable overlap between the Surface and Pro, but the main difference is in the software. Surface runs a desktop OS that has been modified to work on tablets. iPP has an OS that was built from the ground up for multitouch interface. Apple may have taken some hints from Microsoft regarding the keyboard cover, but they are not trying to modify OS X to run on tablets.

 

[aevan]

Sigh... I never said MS did it as a laptop replacement. MS created the Surface for two-fold: 1 - strategic reason - you are correct, 2 - as the showcase platform for the Win-8 concept and the all in one for everything OS.

I'm glad you are certain about the iPad Pro. Very few are and no matter how you tweak your view; it is based on the Surface model. Either way, two designs are driving change: The Thin is in MBA concept and the Surface tablet as a laptop concept.

It doesn't matter whether you said laptop replacement or not, that's not the point. You said Surface was the design driving change, and I said it was not. That's all I am saying. I didn't say 'I was certain about iPad Pro' or its success (btw, you claim 'very few people are' anecdotally or you have proof?), all I said was that it was not influenced by the Surface. Again, it was not. You also claimed Surface was successful - it was not, for a long time, at least not in any objectively measurable way. Basically, what you said just isn't true, in my opinion. You may agree or disagree, but don't nitpick words, the point is - Surface is not a revolutionary, market changing design you claim it to be. Again, in my opinion.

 

[Eric5273]

I think it is clear that while there were many touch screen computers prior to the first iPad, they all used resistive touch screens which made the user experience lousy, so none of them were successful.

The iPad was the first touch screen computer that used a multi-touch capacitive touch screen. That major difference separates these newer tablets from the older ones, and you cannot really compare the success of an older tablet from before 2010 with that of a newer one. The older ones were failures not because the screen size, device size, or keyboard was not good, but were failures because the resistive touch screen user experience is lousy.