Microsoft Takes Another Stab At Tablets, Unveils Surface 2, Surface 2 Pro 381
Dputiger writes "Microsoft has unveiled both the Surface 2 and Surface 2 Pro, updating the former with a Tegra 4 processor and the latter with a new Haswell chip. Among the additional improvements are a more comfortable kickstand with two height settings, 1080p displays for both devices, USB 3.0 support, better battery life, and a higher resolution camera. Pricing for the 32GB Surface without a Touch or Type Cover is set at $449."
Key differences (Score:5, Insightful)
Microsoft seems not to understand. (Score:5, Insightful)
People don't want Microsoft on their tablet. They've lost this war. Ironically, they're losing for the same reason IBM lost control of the PC: They can make all the products they want, but the software that people want runs on an OS owned by someone else.
Re:Key differences (Score:1, Insightful)
The main thing that both Android and Apple based tablets have that Microsoft doesn't, is customers.
Yeah, well, if Google decides to move to a ChromeOS and does a little "embrace, extend, extinguish" dance with Android, Microsoft's offerings are going to be the most open on the market.
But Google doesn't do evil?
Yeah, bullshit. Google's an ad agency. That makes money by selling your privacy.
They kinda fucked up No LTE (Score:4, Insightful)
Microsoft, in late 2013 just came out with 2 tablets that don't offer LTE? Oh right next year they say. Smart business move.
The people with the money to burn on these devices and a wireless plan to go along with them just want to pay once and then have connectivity everywhere without thinking. Definitely a short-sighted move IMHO.
Re:Or alternatively (Score:5, Insightful)
It is the price. They are still trying to sell at Apple prices, but MS is not, and has never been Apple. If they had released a tablet at around $300 they might have had a shot. There is a bit of a price gap at around $300.
still wrong (Score:4, Insightful)
They're still missing the point, so my bet is that it'll collect just as much dust as the old one.
What MS is selling is basically an ultrabook with a touchscreen, not a tablet. They're still not getting that a tablet is an entirely different device with different needs and usage cases.
MS has never been user-aware, always developer-focussed. I'm so happy it's finally biting them in the ass.
Re:Microsoft seems not to understand. (Score:5, Insightful)
No. It's the inverse of that. There are no legacy apps trapping people on the new platform. No one has any 20 year old Microsoft apps tying them to Microsoft's tablet.
It's an open field and Microsoft has to compete on it's own merits including all of the ill will they have generated over the last 30 years.
Re: Or alternatively (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Or alternatively (Score:5, Insightful)
I was thinking "Epic fail 2, and Epic fail 2 pro". It is the price. They are still trying to sell at Apple prices, but MS is not, and has never been Apple. If they had released a tablet at around $300 they might have had a shot. There is a bit of a price gap at around $300.
This. Microsoft needs to compete with Android tablets, not Apple. Microsoft needs a $199 tablet to compete with $199 Android tablets. Surface RT is still overpriced at $349. You're a software company, stop trying to make profit on hardware! Sell the hardware cheap and make the money from sales through the app store! You make the Xbox, haven't you learned anything from how console sales work yet? Or are you purposely pricing yourself far above market so you can lose money? Because that's exactly what this looks like, like you're not even trying.
Re:Or alternatively (Score:5, Insightful)
MS could have just released both tablets as x86 ones, and they would have been decent replacements for primary PCs, especially if the tablets have a decent GPU/chipset.
The Surface 2 is OK, but it has to fight against well-entrenched players.
However, the Surface Pro 2 looks interesting as a primary computer, especially the one with 512GB of flash and 8GB of RAM. It won't win any benchmarks, but with the dock, it could be a decent desktop replacement, especially with USB 3.0 ports. In fact, it might have a long useful life, because it could run Windows Server 2012, Linux, or an OS of choice, and be easily tossed onto the top of a closet to act as a file or web server when it becomes too slow for mainstream software.
Re:Or alternatively (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Microsoft seems not to understand. (Score:4, Insightful)
Assuming you are correct and the droid buyers largely don't care that it's a droid, then most likely cost will be a motivating factor and many droid tablets can be purchased well below the Microsoft tablet offerings. For those that do care that it is a droid, cost may be less of a factor, but then there are most likely going to be droid features that appeal to that market segment. Either way, to the ignorant and informed droid purchaser, droid still wins.
That leaves the premium market. In this market, MS has to compete directly with Apple and one would have to specifically want an MS product to not purchase the iPad.
So, in all three markets, uninformed, informed and premium, it would appear that the only reason somebody is going to choose an MS tablet, is because they really want an MS tablet and not because of the features, price, compatability or just about anything else. That would mean they should sell well with MS fanboys, but that isn't a really good marketing strategy for long term success.
Re: Why aim for shrinking Market share. (Score:5, Insightful)
No, it doesn't. It counts the number of visitors of a particular web site that have content strings that claim they are using an iPad.
Re: Why aim for shrinking Market share. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: Why aim for shrinking Market share. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: Why aim for shrinking Market share. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: Why aim for shrinking Market share. (Score:5, Insightful)
Why is this marked insightful? Are even 1% of users spoofing their user agent string? Are 0.01%?
Re:MS Tablet Strategy (Score:4, Insightful)
It's just sad at this point, watching them hemorrhage money in every hardware space except their video game console division, and even that seems successful DESPITE their mismanagement, not for any brilliant strategy. They need to refocus on their core competencies and give up chasing every market that's just not in their DNA. Give up phones. Give up tablets. Make a solid enterprise and corporate OS/Office Suite. Windows 7 is a great OS that deserves a proper successor without an abhorrent touch interface grafted onto it.
Their customers are screaming at them to sell them what they want but MS is refusing to make those products. The problem is there's a lot more competition these days. MS isn't the only game in town anymore and they can't afford to ignore their customers--which are the OEMs and enterprise.
Re: Why aim for shrinking Market share. (Score:5, Insightful)
> No, it doesn't. It counts the number of visitors of a
> particular web site that have content strings that
> claim they are using an iPad.
Yes! I'm sure TONS of people are using Android tablets or Surfaces but changing their user agents to make it look like they're using iPads. Because then it will look like iPads are more popular and then... sorry, I couldn't think of a single reason that anyone would do that. Someone who loves Apple but is forced to use a competing tablet by their employer? Seriously, I got nothing. Get a better version of a page? If anything, you change your UA to say "something on Desktop", not "something on iPad".
Even if some people are doing it, I can't imagine it's enough to throw off the numbers. "Number of people setting non-iPads to send 'iPad' in their user agent string" divided by "about 90 million" [about.com] equals a very, very small number.
Re: Why aim for shrinking Market share. (Score:5, Insightful)
Why is this marked insightful? Are even 1% of users spoofing their user agent string? Are 0.01%?
No, but it made the poster feel better about his personal biases.
Re:Microsoft seems not to understand. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Microsoft seems not to understand. (Score:5, Insightful)
This works because of your usage case. "I need a 10 inch tablet and would be willing to run office in metro mode, and want to be able to plug a monitor keyboard and mouse into it and am willing to spend $1000-$1200 to do so."
That is NOT a large market at this time. The sweet spot for tablets is 7 to 8 inches. The display is to small to use office effectively. My CFO chokes on $1,000 plus work stations for people that need them for AutoCAD and Photoshop. Since a standard desktop computer is less than $700, that is a hard sell.
There is not a large market for $1000 tablets that would be great on the road AND as a primary workstation.
Re:Or alternatively (Score:5, Insightful)
Two words: no apps.
Re: MS Tablet Strategy (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Or alternatively (Score:5, Insightful)
On spec, maybe it is less of a toy ... and unfortunately, that's what people buy tablets for. Toys.
Is the tablet market grumbling and saying "gee, what we really want is something we can create a spreadsheet on"? Me, I think not and Microsoft may be missing on getting the market as, once again, the "I'm a PC" guys are talking about business uses and not entertainment.
My tablet isn't what I do my work on, it's what I take travelling with me, surf the web, find restaurants, play some stupid games, send a few emails. I didn't buy it to do 'work' on, I bought it to play with, and to use it to look up stuff in the living room or amuse myself on a plane and give me connectivity without dragging my laptop.
If what you're looking for is a small business machine, what you describe sounds pretty cool. But my tablet is more of an e-reader, video game, web surfing, play music and movies kinda thing.
So I wonder if Microsoft is doing what they've always done, and envisioned a world where what people most want to have Office and Outlook -- when what people really want is anything but Office and Outlook. They want an oversized MP3 player that can play games and surf the web and watch videos on Facebook.
They don't need to complete the TPS reports by Thursday.
Re:Or alternatively (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Microsoft seems not to understand. (Score:4, Insightful)
True, but microsoft gained dominance on the desktop by being dominant at work. ...
That was in the days when Lotus 123 and WordStar represented the very state of the art in user experience. Normal people had to be paid to use computers in those days. Those were Microsoft's glory days. And for the most part, that experience is what they associate with Microsoft to this day, helped along by BSODs, viruses, and bloatware all over their new computers. Windows: so bad, you have to be paid to use it.
Gaming, yeah, slightly different. But not all that much. MS had one game that was really loved: Flight Simulator. They killed it.