Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft Introduces New "Surface" Tablet

microsoft.com

651–660 of 697 posts

Re: Microsoft Introduces New "Surface" Tablet

#651
post #561

I don't understand the "OMG MICROSOFT MADE A TABLET IT IS CLEARLY COPYING THE IPAD" reaction Microsoft's getting here. They're absolutely ahead of the curve with the blending of mobile and desktop operating systems, something which I am extremely happy they are doing, and this is absolutely the logical design choices someone in that position would make. Yes, it's very similar to the iPad in many ways. But other than…

How can a product that hasn't shipped yet be 'ahead of the curve'? I have an iPad in my bag right now. Microsoft aren't even on the curve yet. Apple also started blending elements of the iOS UI into OS X, such as multi-touch gestures over a year ago. Maybe MS will leapfrog them. Surface does look interesting, I'm not discounting it, but we'll have to see where Apple and Microsoft stand relative to each other when Sur…

I don't know why you'd think that Microsoft is not even on the curve here. Surface is just the hardware aspect of the complete solution. The Software has been out in beta for a few months now. It's the software that is more responsible for the blending of tablet and laptop than the hardware.

Re: Microsoft Introduces New "Surface" Tablet

#653
post #615

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's pretty obvious where that reaction is coming from. As recently as last year Microsoft was singing the praises of being able to kinda-sorta-use desktop software on a tablet and pushing the notion that things without desktop operating systems were 'consumption' devices, at best. So, yes, their sudden reversal on what people want in a tablet is worth noting and easily justifies the same kind of quips and barbs that…

At home I use a macbook and an ipad. The ipad is a consumption device- it's great for playing a casual game, looking up a recipe, and better than kindle for reading pdf files. It isn't really usable for programming, writing documentation, or any real work (that I do). It doesn't replace my laptop, it just does some things in a more convenient way. Microsoft's Surface looks like (for me) it could replace both the ipad…

For me this tablet/surface could see significant demand from students going back to school this fall. As you said, it's not loger Air + iPad when you can get one device that can do both.

I think it's a pretty good strategy from that standpoint. Additionally, with the Intel version being compatible with desktop apps, this should fit in with the business (corporate) environment.

Of course, this is speculation, but I think it has a pretty good chance at being successful.

Re: Microsoft Introduces New "Surface" Tablet

#654

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't pretend you're the world.

Ok, your argument is that this stuff works for the other 95% but it won’t appeal to us hackers. My question to you is, how does Apple make ads that appeal to the rest of the world and something like 75% of the hackers? When the iPhone first came out, there was no nonsense about the brand and emotion without substance. They made EVERYONE want one. Microsoft may have chosen not to appeal to us. But Apple has shown that…

> When the iPhone first came out, there was no nonsense about the brand and emotion without substance. They made EVERYONE want one.

For the iPhone maybe, except for the non-subsidized price, but this was definitely not true for iPod and iPads.

The general consensus was the iPad was a giant iPhone and was going to fail among techies and the tech media.

Re: Microsoft Introduces New "Surface" Tablet

#655
post #216
post #83

So they're not just going after the iPad, they're also going after the MacBook Air: The Intel version + Touch Cover was repeatedly shown with the regular desktop and apps on it, and generally spun as a sort of light laptop. Ambitious, and finally makes sense of their Metro/desktop combo OS strategy to a degree. The hardware to go along with it was a missing puzzle piece, and I guess shows just how important it can be…

I don't think MS is going after MBA. sure, keyboard may be nicer than bt keyboard for ipad, but that doesn't make it a laptop replacement. the os -- windows rt -- may be as restrictive as ipad is, quite different from the windows for desktop. There is nothing inspiring in this product, at least they didn't answer a question: is there something new we can do with this tablet?

> There is nothing inspiring in this product, at least they didn't answer a question: is there something new we can do with this tablet?

The new thing is this is a all-in-one machine that can be your only computer.

You can browse the web in tablet mode, then put it on a table, plug in a mouse and play starcraft on a desktop.

Nothing on the market (except old win7 tablets) can do that.

Re: Microsoft Introduces New "Surface" Tablet

#656
post #615

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's pretty obvious where that reaction is coming from. As recently as last year Microsoft was singing the praises of being able to kinda-sorta-use desktop software on a tablet and pushing the notion that things without desktop operating systems were 'consumption' devices, at best. So, yes, their sudden reversal on what people want in a tablet is worth noting and easily justifies the same kind of quips and barbs that…

At home I use a macbook and an ipad. The ipad is a consumption device- it's great for playing a casual game, looking up a recipe, and better than kindle for reading pdf files. It isn't really usable for programming, writing documentation, or any real work (that I do). It doesn't replace my laptop, it just does some things in a more convenient way. Microsoft's Surface looks like (for me) it could replace both the ipad…

If they pull this off, a Windows Phone and a Surface will replace a $3000 Apple set that someone like my mom would use and love.

As a deeply invested Apple user, it is nice to see Msft finally making something I might want to use.

Re: Microsoft Introduces New "Surface" Tablet

#657
post #595
post #512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before the iPad, Microsoft was using the "PC interface", to the disadvantage of the tablets they were putting it on. Now they are doing the reverse: making a tablet interface to the disadvantage of the PC. The "all-in-one" interface for all types of devices and form factors will never work, because at best it's optimized only for one of them, and mediocre or poor for most of the others.

If I read you correctly, you're basically saying that the desktop and slate/phone should have different user interfaces. Well, that's exactly what win8 delivers. When you're building a piece of software you can choose to give it a metro-style UI, a classical desktop UI, or both. That way, your application works across desktops, slates, and WP8 phones. IE10 for example can be run as a full-screen metro app, or as a 'c…

But they are really forcing you into the Metro interface, and it's quite clear they would like to "phase out" the desktop part in a couple of generations.

Re: Microsoft Introduces New "Surface" Tablet

#658
post #588

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not looking to replace my primary computer. I'm looking for a secondary device (one device, not 2 or 3) that can do a handful of things that I most often need. The main reason I want to hook a device like that with my TV is so that I can download and watch movies (from torrents). AFAIK you cannot do that on the iPad. I'm I mistaken?

Yes, you are: http://store.apple.com/us/product/MD098ZM/A?mco=MTY3ODQ5OTY

How does one get torrented movies onto the iPad?

How does one watch the movies? (which app?)

(Genuine questions, I'm curious and don't have one)

Re: Microsoft Introduces New "Surface" Tablet

#659
post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who considers the current MacBook Air to be "the computer", enough to have made it my primary and only machine, the MacBook Air from four years ago was horrible: I laughed at my friends that got it, and I laughed all the harder when they didn't use it for months and then got a usable laptop. The 2010 Air is honestly barely the same device as the one from 2008. My point: pulling statements from four years a…

How was it horrible? Compared to other ultraportables at the time it was exceptionally good (I bought a FSC Q2010 just before the iPad came out.)

To start with, the 13" model (the only one available in 2008) isn't even that (ultra)portable; it is sure thin, but in comparison to that FSC Q2010 it is a monster: it is 50% heavier with an additional inch of width and half an inch of depth.

In exchange for being more consistent in its thickness (despite having almost identical thickest points), the FSC Q2010 ends up with a plethora of ports: in addition to an ethernet port (although one that requires an adapter), you had ExpressCard, an SD card slot, an external microphone jack, and two USB ports.

Now, looking back to the Air, one of the interesting design choices they went with in 2008 was to get rid of the ethernet port entirely. This is not as much of a problem with the later Airs, and not for the reason you might think... (it isn't just that WiFi became more plentiful).

Instead, the MacBook Air 2010/2011 came with two USB ports, and the 2012 model adds a thunderbolt port: it is totally fine to use an adapter on a random extra port. Instead, the 2008 MacBook Air had a single USB port; this, combined with the mini display port, was the only extensibility on the device.

In essence, everything you could possibly attach to this device but the monitor had to go in to the one port, so if you wanted 1) cellular or wired internet and 2) an iPod/iPhone, you couldn't do it. I had a friend that was travelling and ended up sitting outside of a hotel in his car trying to steal enough WiFi just to upgrade his phone to the latest firmware.

However, it isn't just these external inconveniences that defined this device; to get an idea of just how spartan the 2008 MacBook Air was, you have to realize that they didn't even manage to get stereo speakers into it: yes, the thing had only one mono speaker. This was fixed in the 2010 versions. ;P

While the RAM configuration on the 2008 MacBook Air trounces your FSC Q2010 (a device that, despite its name, seems to have been sold in 2006?), it still couldn't go past 2GB, which even at the time (the contemporary MacBook Pro took 4GB) limited your options as a developer, or even a browser of many websites. In 2010 they upped it to 4GB maximum.

Looking at the 2006 specifications for this FSC Q2010, it is ludicrous just how much stuff they stuck in it.... I mean, you had a 2G cellular radio... the people I know who travelled with the Air had to carry around a massive USB dongle to accomplish that (as in 2008, phone tethering wasn't yet that common or convenient).

In essence, no: I'd argue that the MacBook Air, in 2008, was a horrible device that was mostly based on some kind of weird design fetish of "how thin can I make a computer housed in a metal case". It was not really attempting to be a usable system: it was at best a proof-of-concept for what, after two years of re-engineering effort, they might be able to make into an awesome machine.

The result at the time was then large (width/depth), underpowered (RAM/CPU), under-featured (mono speakers), and unextensible (a single port); this is even in comparison to computers that had come out years earlier (the 2006 FSC Q2010) that were significantly lighter (2.2lbs vs. 3.0lbs).

Re: Microsoft Introduces New "Surface" Tablet

#660

I don't understand the "OMG MICROSOFT MADE A TABLET IT IS CLEARLY COPYING THE IPAD" reaction Microsoft's getting here. They're absolutely ahead of the curve with the blending of mobile and desktop operating systems, something which I am extremely happy they are doing, and this is absolutely the logical design choices someone in that position would make. Yes, it's very similar to the iPad in many ways. But other than…

Absolutely. Apple's vision for tablet-computer integration is to dumb down the computer. Microsoft can't afford to do that.

The main thing Apple did with the iPad was make it work without any major gotchas. Sure, you could have stuck a desktop CPU and desktop OS in a touchscreen device. Other people tried that. It wasn't appealing.

The iPad gave long battery life, a comfortable form-factor, solid usability and reliability, an impossibly low price point for such high-end hardware, and most importantly it was a tablet above all else. Every app becomes the machine. That's entirely different than carrying a desktop around in an iPad-sized box.

Be careful if you think this is simply dumbing down a desktop, because it shows you're missing the point.

Post reply on HN