Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft’s Hardware, Round 2: Surface 2 and Surface Pro 2

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 255 posts

Re: Microsoft’s Hardware, Round 2: Surface 2 and Surface Pro 2

#201

Post by seanmcdirmid »

bhauer wrote: post #196
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> * Surface 2 loses the low-density screen. I enjoy that low-density has been deprecated. The 1.5X screen of the Surface 2 is definitely better than its old 1X screen, but will that be competitive with the 2X screens in other tablets (Android and Apple) at the same or lower price points?

No, not on screen clarity (though color accuracy competitiveness is still uncertain). I would personally prefer a 250+ DPI display. But retiring the abomination known as "1366x768" is long overdue. So as you say, the progression is definitely better. All considered, I'd much prefer to sink R&D into a 250+ DPI large form-factor desktop display than cram even more pixels into my Surface. The monitors I stare at for hou…

We are getting 31" 4K displays this year that come close (doesn't have to be 250 DPI at desktop viewing distance, but the high 100s would be nice). They are expensive ATM, but should come down in price pretty quickly. The only question I have is if Windows and its application ecosystem will be ready for it? There seems to be a lot of scrambling right now to prepare for a new high DPI status quo, so I'm very optimistic.

Re: Microsoft’s Hardware, Round 2: Surface 2 and Surface Pro 2

#202

Post by SimonPStevens »

MBCook wrote: post #198
SimonPStevens wrote: post #190

There is a simple change Microsoft need to make to the Surface RT to make it viable. Fix app compatibility. Start by removing the artificial restriction on desktop apps. Currently desktop apps are restricted to those signed by Microsoft. If they were to remove this restriction there's a whole load of apps that could be recompiled to target ARM and work on the RT desktop. Companies and open source devs would be far mo…

> Start by removing the artificial restriction on desktop apps. I would say the desktop is the biggest problem with Surface RT. It's clear they wanted an iPad, but ended up tacking on the desktop because Windows 8 couldn't operate in Metro-only mode (some settings, etc not available) and Office wasn't ready. Fix that. Drop the desktop so there is no more confusion on the RT. You want the desktop? You want the pro. Yo…

I understand the point you are making, but the fact is without the app ecosystem a tablet like that is just going to be third place to the iPad and Android tablets. They need to offer a compelling reason to purchase a surface over those other brands of tablets. The windows desktop with a decent selection of apps (because of the removed signature lock) would offer that.

The thing is I don't actually specifically want a pro. All I want is a device that I can create content on. For me, creating content means I want it to run Visual Studio, Photoshop and Blender, along with some toolchain type apps like Git, Dropbox and Filezilla. These apps are just not ever going to appear as Metro apps. So currently, I choose to buy a laptop for half the price of a Surface pro.

The problem is the competition they have targeted. They've pitched the RT against the IPad and Androids and it loses on functionality, and they've pitched the pro against Laptops and it loses on price. An unrestricted RT would win against the IPad/Android on functionality and the win against the laptop on size and flexibility while matching it on price.

Re: Microsoft’s Hardware, Round 2: Surface 2 and Surface Pro 2

#203

Post by camus »

Yuioup wrote: post #175

Fail 2 and Fail Pro 2

Yeah, yet Microsoft still believes in that failure. They dont get that nobody want their Microsoft stuffs, they should stick to software. Nobody trust Microsoft anymore. Especially businnesses after X license audits ... I'm glad people understand how dangerous this company really is. They definetly lost the cellphone/tablet battle.

Re: Microsoft’s Hardware, Round 2: Surface 2 and Surface Pro 2

#204

Post by camus »

MBCook wrote: post #198
SimonPStevens wrote: post #190

There is a simple change Microsoft need to make to the Surface RT to make it viable. Fix app compatibility. Start by removing the artificial restriction on desktop apps. Currently desktop apps are restricted to those signed by Microsoft. If they were to remove this restriction there's a whole load of apps that could be recompiled to target ARM and work on the RT desktop. Companies and open source devs would be far mo…

> Start by removing the artificial restriction on desktop apps. I would say the desktop is the biggest problem with Surface RT. It's clear they wanted an iPad, but ended up tacking on the desktop because Windows 8 couldn't operate in Metro-only mode (some settings, etc not available) and Office wasn't ready. Fix that. Drop the desktop so there is no more confusion on the RT. You want the desktop? You want the pro. Yo…

They should kill Metro/Modern UI on desktop ,it's the stupidest thing Microsoft has ever done.

Re: Microsoft’s Hardware, Round 2: Surface 2 and Surface Pro 2

#205

Post by city41 »

SimonPStevens wrote: post #202
MBCook wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Start by removing the artificial restriction on desktop apps. I would say the desktop is the biggest problem with Surface RT. It's clear they wanted an iPad, but ended up tacking on the desktop because Windows 8 couldn't operate in Metro-only mode (some settings, etc not available) and Office wasn't ready. Fix that. Drop the desktop so there is no more confusion on the RT. You want the desktop? You want the pro. Yo…

I understand the point you are making, but the fact is without the app ecosystem a tablet like that is just going to be third place to the iPad and Android tablets. They need to offer a compelling reason to purchase a surface over those other brands of tablets. The windows desktop with a decent selection of apps (because of the removed signature lock) would offer that. The thing is I don't actually specifically want…

I have a Surface Pro and I don't feel it competes against laptops at all. Its screen is too small to use the desktop for any period of time. The keyboard (both the touch and type variants) are terrible for doing any real quantity of typing. The trackpad is clunky and primitive, using your finger on the screen itself is also a poor substitute for a real mouse. And finally, you have to have a steady, solid surface to use it in "laptop" mode. On the train? On the couch? Forget it, tablet form is your only option.

I really like my Surface a lot. However I feel it has two use cases: a very powerful (and quite nice) tablet (really, metro is wonderful!) or as a desktop with a monitor, keyboard and mouse attached. At work we are a Mac shop, being able to take something out that is tablet sized but becomes a full fledged Windows PC by borrowing the needed peripherals from the Macs is really awesome.

Re: Microsoft’s Hardware, Round 2: Surface 2 and Surface Pro 2

#206

Post by jsz0 »

kijin wrote: post #19

The docking station looks fantastic. We've finally reached the day when we can plug in the tablet when we get home and instantly transform it into a full-blown desktop PC! Too bad the 512GB/8GB model will probably cost an arm and a leg, making it more economical for most people to simply buy two computers. But once the price comes down a bit, I can see this becoming a true drop-in replacement for the majority of Wind…

The numbers still don't seem to add up though. For the same price you could get a (much) cheaper/lighter ARM tablet that gets much better battery life and a better desktop. I'm not sure what the point of convergence is here unless you have some specific need to run a legacy win32 app on a tablet.

Re: Microsoft’s Hardware, Round 2: Surface 2 and Surface Pro 2

#207

Post by maximilianburke »

MBCook wrote: post #198
SimonPStevens wrote: post #190

There is a simple change Microsoft need to make to the Surface RT to make it viable. Fix app compatibility. Start by removing the artificial restriction on desktop apps. Currently desktop apps are restricted to those signed by Microsoft. If they were to remove this restriction there's a whole load of apps that could be recompiled to target ARM and work on the RT desktop. Companies and open source devs would be far mo…

> Start by removing the artificial restriction on desktop apps. I would say the desktop is the biggest problem with Surface RT. It's clear they wanted an iPad, but ended up tacking on the desktop because Windows 8 couldn't operate in Metro-only mode (some settings, etc not available) and Office wasn't ready. Fix that. Drop the desktop so there is no more confusion on the RT. You want the desktop? You want the pro. Yo…

The name is also terrible. Pro vs RT makes it sound like one is picking a trim level of car. It makes it seem like they're both the same with minor differences on the surface. But they're not. They're quite different.

Call one the Work, and one the Play. The Work gets the desktop, full Windows 8, full Office, Visual Studio, etc., the Play gets Metro and enough support to not be completely useless but also enough to create a separate market segment.

Bundle them both with keyboards. Give the "real" keyboard (the Surface Type Cover) to the Work, because people with this tablet will be the ones writing Office documents. Give the cardboardy Touch Cover to those that buy the Play because they just need it when the touch screen becomes a little too annoying to bang out that email to your family while on vacation.

Differentiated products for markets that should now be able to self select with less confusion.

Re: Microsoft’s Hardware, Round 2: Surface 2 and Surface Pro 2

#208

Post by felixfurtak »

teamonkey wrote: post #115
shurcooL wrote: post #51

Why is there a photo of an external monitor with 3840x2160 and nothing is mentioned about it? Is it because it's just a hypothetical display that could be connected via the Mini DisplayPort, had it existed?

3840x2160 is Ultra HD. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4K_resolution#Monitors

Strange nomenclature. I would have thought it should be called Quad-HD since it is precisely 4 x 1920x1080 screens.

Re: Microsoft’s Hardware, Round 2: Surface 2 and Surface Pro 2

#209

Post by jsz0 »

Todd wrote: post #86
enko wrote: post #24

Dear Microsoft: Out of ARM and x86, choose one. Just choose one. For the love of god, choose ONE. Can you imagine Apple, or anyone else, deliberately releasing two different tablets, with the same name, which can not run each others' software? It is inconceivable, and for good reason. MS cannot make decisions. That's what will kill them, long term. Just choose one!!

Why does Apple get a pass on this? They have just taken the alternative approach of fracturing their OS and hardware. It's natural because of where they started (iPod -> iPhone -> iPad), so this isn't a criticism. As a consequence, this is one area where MS is ahead of Apple (even if MS is having difficulties reconciling the tablet vs. desktop experience). MS has touch on the desktop. When is Apple going to have touc…

Given the sales of Surface and touchscreen PCs I have to reject the whole premise of your question. What is Apple getting a 'pass' on here? They seem to be giving consumers what they want/expect out of these devices. Apple could snap their fingers and have a touch enabled version of OSX that's better than Windows 8. They could easily add an x86 target for iOS apps and have a massive library of native touch enabled apps for the Mac. They could do a legacy touch mode as good (low standard) as what Windows 8 has to offer. They obviously haven't done it because they think it sucks. Again given that the market has said the same thing so far the premise of the question is really backwards to me. Apple is getting a pass on not picking a failing strategy!

Re: Microsoft’s Hardware, Round 2: Surface 2 and Surface Pro 2

#210

Post by meepmorp »

chatman wrote: post #173
meepmorp wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, it's weird. Maybe it's just poor choice of photos by Ars, but the guy looks like a bored, minimum wage employee hawking those things at a mall kiosk.

That is insulting. Perhaps you earn more than "minimum wage", but please be respectful to everyone. Everyone out there is doing a job and deserves respect, even if he's earning a minimum wage or if he's working at a mall kiosk.

Yeah, after I wrote it I thought it sounded a little obnoxious. Ah well.

At least I got a nice lecture about respect.

Post reply on HN