Why I love Microsoft’s vapourware tablet When I first got into this journalism lark in the late 1980s, the exploding nature of the personal computer market would force the hand of IT companies to reveal products far in advance of their intended launch date. Such was the race to give the appearance of being cutting-edge, they sometimes found themselves announcing …
Yes alluding (if that's a strong enough term for stating it in the headline) to the product being vapourware and then showing a video of an actual device in use is quite a strange choice...
Oh yes and those "manufacturing mock ups" will have been floating around the software teams in probably quite large numbers in various revisions for months. You wouldn't expect the average consumer to know that - but if you're writing an article about it, perhaps some research into the workings of the mobile device industry would have been prudent?
Here's a hint: they don't finish the software (or hardware) the day before they hit the shops, but it is demonstrable at least in some form, quite some time before that. Pretty much explains everything written.
meaningless, even iPads have done this at launch IIRC.
A price of £1k would be a massive deal-breaker though. Compete directly with the iPad perhaps but costing more is crazy... unless that's for the Intel version only and the ARM one will be considerably cheaper. After all an Intel tablet kind of IS like an ultrabook only even smaller and smaller means pricier.
"So you missed the launch where Jobs had to tell the journos to turn off their laptops and phones because the iPad's WiFi wouldn't work otherwise? I think it was the iPad 2."
You think wrong. It was the iPhone 4 that was being demoed, and the issue you are referring to was that there were 500+ wifi networks in operation in the convention centre. The iPhone did not crash.
"Hmmm... if the other people using the wifi were managing to connect, albeit slowly, while the iPhone 4 couldn't..."
...how do you know that every other person was able to connect ok..? Note the figure quoted was *networks*, not devices. That's a lot of spectrum being saturated - I would expect quite a lot of problems getting on.
"I reckoned the number of networks cited as an exaggeration. Obviously, 500 WIFI networks in the same building would not only prevent everyone from connecting, but also microwave them to death ;-)."
There are 5000 seats at WWDC. I don't think it's unreasonable that 10% of attendees use a MiFi or equivalent.
There seems to be some confusion going on here. There are TWO versions of the surface tablet. One is a Tegra 3 powered WinRT machine, which is expected to sell for the same kind of money as an iPad. Being Arm powered it won't be able to run any of the back catalog of Windows code.
The second tablet is Core i5 powered and is likely to be priced like an Ultra Book. It is large and more powerful than its sibling, and WILL be able to run old code, allong with providing a digitiser pen. it will however be unlikely to run for more than 5 hours on battery as its only got 40w hours of capacity.
Both are of course still vapourware and subject to change.
The "ultrabook price" is for the x86 version and that basically is an ultrabook but with all the touchscreen, stylus stuff and the ability to turn into a pure tablet. The ARM version is supposed to be price competitive with other tablets, e.g. an iPad. Though again, it has the keyboard, etc. so it's not exactly an iPad equivalent.
> it has the keyboard, etc. so it's not exactly an iPad equivalent.
It appears that it will have a choice of keyboards, a 3mm touch or a 5mm moving key. This implies that they will be options, or accessories, and not in the basic price of the units. This means that they will be priced at (iPad3 price) + keyboard for RT or (Ultrabook price) + keyboard for Pro.
iPads can have keyboards. Bluetooth ones allow the unit to be landscape or portrait, and for the keyboard to be used more conveniently than locked to the screen unit.
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-31747_7-20091329-243/keyboarding-your-ipad-best-keyboard-cases/
Sure Apple has had a couple of crashes with pre-release versions of OSX during keynotes (WWDC 2006 I think?) and swiftly swapped screens over, but can't remember any iPad crashes.
There's a clear difference in preparedness. Microsoft's stage crashes tend to drag on for a long time until the point hilarity ensues ... they're just not ready for them.
This one with Bill Gates and Conan O'Brien is my favourite: http://www.break.com/index/gatesconan.html
Just so people are clear, the Surface RT device did not crash, it was the Netflix app that crashed. Sure he could have terminated the Netflix and restarted it but if it were me I'd have done he same and switched out the unit rather than risk the app failing again because of something specific to that unit.
Oh and by the way, or vapourware, Microsoft sure seems to have made enough of them already. This will enter production. Two things about the timing: 1. It makes people stop and re-think about that iPad/Ultrabook purchase. 2. It gives OEMs fair notice to up their game if they want a slice of the action.
Car manufacturers have long been showing off cars up to a year before they enter production.
Apple don't make announcements about their new tablet 6 months before, they just get their suppliers to 'leak' details. That way if the specs change or there is a delay in manufacturing they have an element of plausible deniability and the fanboys can go on thinking that the company is perfect in every way.
Yep, that's the smart thing to do.
Never announce something until it's in a container on the way to the shops or sat in your warehouse.
Then pretend to be really surprised when somebody 'accidentally' leaks the details while you're still developing it.
All the exposure of a premature launch, none of the risks of the cries of "vapourware!!!"
"Upvoted nonetheless for calling Dabbs crap. That can't happen often enough."
If Dabbs is crap, what the hell were you doing reading this article? I've stopped reading the 'Open and Shut' stuff from that ex Ubuntu guy, because most of it is rubbish. Although he's written a few good ones. I thought the first article I noticed by Dabbs was utterly rubbish, but I've enjoyed his last few, including this one.
I actually thought that Microsoft rushed this event because it was about to be upstaged by someone else in the coming weeks.
It's quite a clever offering and has got the tech world talking, simply because it's something else to write about that isn't iOS, Android etc, but as it isn't out for some time.
Microsoft is taking a big risk. With the geeks like us soon forgetting about it, a lot of hard work will have been potentially wasted by the time it does come out - if indeed it does.
Sure, it now means that Microsoft can claim to have been first (and the cover/keyboard idea is something I bet Apple wishes it had done) but Joe Public probably don't know sod all about Windows 8 as there is no advertising of the OS yet, let alone the Surface.
I think it was announced too far in advance and for no real gain (other than to keep us Brits up late following the event, and to annoy hardware makers that now see Microsoft as a threat to their own business), which is why I return to my previous assumption that Microsoft felt they had to show the Surface at short notice for another reason we'll come to realise in the near future.
I wonder if someone like Samsung had come up with something like this for its new tablet with a iPad 3-style resolution? Or maybe Google has something like this for one of its new Nexus tablets (or maybe the two are one and the same!)?
"A tablet that needs a keyboard is a fail."
I'm afraid that's utter bollocks.
I think my iPad is brilliant, but typing anything more than about 2 paragraphs on it is extremely annoying. Even just typing in url's is irksome. I therefore don't type on it much. That's OK, it's not what I bought it for. But it would be nice to have a keyoard, in the odd meeting or so I can send off a quick email. I've not seen a decent looking cover/keyboard for less than about £80, so I've not bothered. It's not a must-have, but the option would be nice. A tablet needs a keyboard if you want to type into it. You could then say, just get a laptop, but the advantage of a tablet is for using it on the sofa/train. It's a matter of making choices available. Some people want a device for a bit of light laptop work, as well as the kind of media consumption that tablets are great at.
Personally I think a stylus would be more useful. Handwriting recognition is much nicer than pecking at an onscreen keyboard, as well as much easier (and more natural) to do when you're holding the tablet in one hand. You also gain the ability to sketch. I don't know how well the digitiser pens work with capacative touch screens, but Samsung seem to have manged it with the Galaxy Note. I wish Apple had gone that route with the iPad. A decent, well-implemented stylus is what will have me jumping ship from iOS to whatever platform can do it.
"A tablet that needs a keyboard is a fail."
Where does it say the surface tablet *needs* a keyboard?
That's like saying the ipad is a fail because Apple make bluetooth keyboards that you can hook up to it.
Not saying this will be a world beater or anything, and no one can because it isn't being made yet, so criticising it like that is like criticising the ipad 5 - its impossible to criticise as it doesn't really exist yet - it was the whole point of the article.
But I guess that's never stopped a rabid Apple fanboi in the past from launching into an anti-MS rant...
In about 2007/8 I bought an HP tablet with swivelly keyboard, for £650. The slates were all well over £1,000 at the time. Vista wasn't too bad for touch. The handwriting recognition was very good, and you had one of the Wacom styluses (styli?) for precision. As well as a track-pad, keyboard and USB for a mouse. Windows isn't as bad as some people say on touch (especially with the stylus to fall back on). Just a bit of work to make scrollbars and buttons bigger would have worked wonders. It could have gone from geeky toy, to useful work tool for very little effort from MS and HP - although not mainstream.
If MS hadn't dropped the ball on their mobile side 5 years ago, they could have had a scaled-up version of their current Win Pho with a few more years of polish on it ages ago, or a cut-down version of Win7 for tablets.
But they didn't. And Apple built the iPad. For which I sold my Vista tablet. I miss my stylus, and sometimes even the keyboard. I even miss Flash, once or twice a month.
The problem as I see it is that the WinRT tablet is unlikely to be any better than an iPad. I like WinPho 7, I got the Lumia 710 as it's a third the cost of the cheapest iPhone, with better hardware. And I think it's a better phone but worse computer. And I'm in a minority, I've got half the downvotes I've ever had commenting on El Reg from being nice about WinPho 7. Not many people have bought it, so there's not much love for it that's going to translate into sales.
What might attract me from my iPad 3 is the Intel one. Full fat Win8 with a lovely stylus and a nice keyboard cover. But that's going to weigh half as much again, have shorter battery life and probably cost considerably more. and no lovely screen. The iPad 3 screen really is amazingly nice.
Had they brought this out 1-2 years ago then they'd have been looking good. Even had they been in time to battle the iPad 3, I might have been interested. But the ARM version is unlikely to be much better than an iPad 2, so is 18 months late to market.
Can the Intel one sell well to IT departments, where they've got group policies and proper management tools? Or have the execs and sales droids already forced them to go the iPad route? Can't see the Intel one selling well to consumers. That looks more like a nice geek-toy to me, and maybe business tool. And I've already given Apple my soul, for an iPad 3...
Why oh why is everyone assuming the battery life will be crap? Have you looked at what is possible even using current technology? We already have Ultrabooks that can last up to 8 hours (Samsung series 9). There is no reason to think the battery will fall short. Given the amount of thought Microsoft clearly has invested in the Surface, do people really think they'd go with a crappy battery life? Of course not. They'll either source the best battery cells or make damn sure that the Windows 8 OS is capable of conserving as much power as possible when it is used on such a device. Serisously folks, just think about it. Three years of military grade secret development and they just slap in a run of he mill power pack? Don't think so. I'll bet it'll have battery life parity with the iPad or Galaxy Tab.
Pegatron has been announced as the manufacturer. The Surface RT specs look surprisingly close to their current lineup of Tegra 3 tablets, and Asus even demo'ed their own Windows RT and Windows 8 tablets recently. Sure, the case is new and the keyboard on the Tegra model is a novelty, but the hardware in this case isn't a boardroom fantasy: it is a high-end version of current technology (perhaps a bit dated once it hits shelves) made to showcase Windows 8's two versions.
"Exists" =/= Stuff that's almost the same hardware running a different OS.
It's not in a warehouse, it's not coming off the line in China as I type this. The OS is not even finished!
There is a prototype / mock-up, running beta software. It's not the same "it" that will show up on store shelves.
Except that if you hate Windows 8 then you'll not like this tablet. The addition of the traditional desktop is more of a backward compatibility options.
If you get the ARM version you're stuck with Windows RT as nothing else will be allowed to boot (although I'm sure someone will crack this ).
@AC - I admit, I'm not sold on Win 8 for the desktop, but it IS an OS designed for a touch interface. Should be pretty OK on a Surface.
And all ARM tablets are stuck with the OS that they shipped with. iPad only runs iOS, Transformer only runs Android. (Well, without hacking anyways)
It's one thing to have some simple locking to stop you messing around, but the secure boot in Windows 8 is a step too far.
It requires Linux vendors to buy code signing certificates to get their OS to boot.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_8#Secure_boot
Okay so for sitting on the coffee table and spending most of its operational time looking up stuff to confirm arguments/facts over stuff watched on TV or to look up where we saw 'that actor' before on IMDB we have the choice of -
A Windows 8 Tablet at £600+
or
A dual core IPS Android tablet for £200.
Yeah.....
Because MS is demonstrating exactly this. There's "Surface", an ARM-based tablet that is very similar to the iPad: Halfway affordable, light, long-running, Appstore-only apps. Just that it will run *only* Metro-only Apps for Windows 8 compiled for ARM, of which exactly none exists right now. Hard to see why it should fare better than WP7 with smartphones.
Then there's "Surface Pro", an Intel-based low-end Ultrabook with an optional awkward keyboard and a display angle you can't adjust, making a hot and short running, heavy, expensive tablet PC into a laptop you won't be able to use on your lap. It will also run every old Windows application on a 11.6" screen with 1920 x 1080 pixels, which will mean the keyboard, trackpad, digitizer and stylus aren't just nice options -- they are there for a reason. How this thing should be much more successful than the bad old Tablet PCs I don't know.
So each of these devices lacks something important that the other has in scores: Surface is a great tablet with no apps and Surface pro has all the apps and compatibility without being an usable tablet or even an Ultrabook.
MS should have named them "!Synergy".
When it comes to marketing then Microsoft still has a lot to learn IMO. And that shouldn't come as a surprise either because we're talking about a company which used to dominate the market. But now we're long past the era where "Whatever Microsoft says goes".
Which I think is the main problem.
Just look at the recent announcements regarding the Windows Phone. Many people bought the device because they were under the impression that the smartphone would at least be supported for a long period, just like MS is doing with their OS environments.
Granted; Windows Mobile 6.5 set a wrong example, but taken into context all the signs around WP7 (specific hardware requirements, specific build requirements, etc) made it look as if MS itself wasn't taken their actions around WM6.5 lightly and were determined to come up with a longer lasting and more mature environment.
And now we're almost 1.5 years away and suddenly a new platform (WP8) has been announced. Nothing wrong there perse; but leaving the current userbase in the dark about the future of the current platform isn't exactly smart marketing. And insinuating that the current environment won't get any updates or enhancements apart from a visual change to make it look like the new one wasn't that smart either IMO.
Note that I'm saying insinuating, not stating. Fact is we don't know for sure what is going to happen to the current platform. But despite that many WP7 users are getting a very bad feeling about these developments, right up to the point that some are in the process of selling their WP7 device right now (not making this up, and no; I'm not talking about myself).
As such my conclusion: Microsoft needs to brush up their marketing skills, esp. when it comes to dealing with current customers.
You know, I never thought of that... but really it's true, when it comes to marketing they really don't have a clue (one exception, below). In the past Microsoft has always had the lever of the desktop monopoly to use in conquering adjacent markets, mixed in with a variable dose of FUD and the occasional underhanded behaviour.
The difference is that these days it's very easy for the consumer to go somewhere else - online services and free mobiles on contract.
Although Xbox has not made them money, that is the one area where the "bad old Microsoft" tricks have not been pulled and the product has been sold against established competitors in a fair fight. Let's hope there will be more of that from MS, and less of the bad old ways.
"In the past Microsoft has always had the lever of the desktop monopoly to use in conquering adjacent markets"
That's the only sort of marketing Microsoft know. The Metro/Win8 mess is Microsoft disrupting their desktop business to serve the needs of marketing mobile,tablet and embedded devices. Instead of building new product and new marketing they simply pervert the existing monopoly so it can carry on as normal as a coercive marketing tool. It seems there's no limit to how much they'll screw over desktop users along the way.
BTW XBox had one major value to PC users: it forced game writers to use DX9. That largely defused their Vista/Win7 strategy of hooking gamers into updates by not upgrading XP beyond DX9. There are only a handful of games that won't run on XP, giving little pressure to upgrade for most gamers.
Thanks for speakling on behalf of all us WP7 users. I must be the only one who thinks it's been too long for WP8 announcement and they should be much farther down the road with it. It's been 1.5 years and we're only now getting a sneak peak!! WTF!
What I can't get my head around is why Microsoft are such bastards that they are the only company to lock users of downlevel clients out of all the juicy new features because of hardware restrictions.
Wait, what... http://cdn.macrumors.com/article-new/2012/06/ios6-feature-chart.png ... oh.
Every iOS device released so far has enjoyed at least one new major OS release. Every device manufactured in the last two years is compatible with its 6.
WP7 phones continue to be manufactured now, but not one of them will ever receive the major OS update expected this year.
Are you actually incapable of seeing why the latter deal is significantly worse than the former?
Which is basically because switching from the WinCE kernel to the full blown Windows kernel obviously meant that WP8 wouldn't run too well. So a multicore CPU is needed.
I feel sorry for the Lumia 900 users who just bought a phone only to find out their phone can't run WP8.
"Every device manufactured in the last two years is compatible with its 6"
Except Siri is very picky isn't she? OS updates are one thing, but you aren't getting all the features of the new OS, which kinda defeats the purpose...
The MS/Lumia situation is sucky I agree, but iOS is no utopia. Sure you can say that's based on hardware restrictions, but isn't that the WP7 situation too?
I think you're right but surely MS must realise that pre-emotive striking does not work in public relations. People remember the last thing they hear, not the first. By announcing early to beat Google, Microsoft is effectively positioning Surface as the first performer at Eurovision.
@Alistair: it doesn't work if your new shiny won't arrive in the same year as the competition, no-one waits more than a few weeks to widen their choice of new toy. So of course Microsoft had to fall back on making theirs so incredibly shiny it might buy a few months. So shiny punters won't notice the deception, the good one is too expensive, the cheap one can't do the things they're talking up.
What a pity the Nexus tablets are already on the container ships, ready for launch next week ;)
This post has been deleted by its author
By going down the RT / 8 route they've shot themselves in the foot. They are hoping (and praying) that Developers will simply port their older applications to some form of Metro application, so they can eventually drop the Desktop side of things altogether, which is just crazy and won't happen in a million years. The RT / 8 thing will just confuse the public who may have games or other bits of software that they would rather keep using, which they will eventually find out to their annoyance they can't run on that Windows RT tablet.
I think Metro has some really good features and ideas, but after using the release preview since it came out it still feels like the Desktop aspect has just been tacked on as an afterthought. Apple have the right approach in their strategy. They are keeping iOS and OS X as two separate entities, but in the background with each release of OS X more iOS look and feel is creeping in there, but with the trackpad and it's gestures if Apple turned around tomorrow and said you can now use your iOS apps on OS X there wouldn't be much of a issue in achieving it due to the way they've built the two OSes to have the same core, but kept the GUI totally seperate - one for touch - one for keyboard and mouse
This was the perfect opportunity for Microsoft to have Microsoft Metro on Phones and Tablets and continued with a Desktop only version of Windows 8. Instead they've just dumped Metro UI on top of Windows 7 and it is awful. I've still got the Release Preview on a netbook and its annoying because it feels like it was written entirely for a tablet and the Desktop is an afterthought.
Sometimes I think that the glitchy demonstration was designed to distract everyone from the real issues.
2012 is the 10th anniversary of Windows unification. Before that, there was Windows, Windows 95, WIndows 98 and Windows ME on the one side; and Windows for Workgroups, Windows NT, and Windows 2000 on the other side. The two tracks were only semi-compatible. NT did not have the dlls to run games, media entertainment, and other consumer apps; 98 did not have the stability to run business apps all day without crashing.
XP put a temporary end to those days. Microsoft found it wasn't easy to advance beyond XP while maintaing that unity. Vista, anyone? Many business users decided to stick with XP. Now Microsoft is going with two families of hardware WITH different processors, different peripherals, and different operating systems. In the past, Microsoft had its hands full with two operating systems on the same processor.
The MacBook Air and the iPad have different processors, peripherals, and operating systems as well; however, Apple does not try to mislead anyone into believing that the two are software compatible. I have a suspicion that anyone who believes that Windows 8 RT and PRO will be compatible will be buying a bag of hurt.
AD hits the nail, squarely on the head.
Samo, samo. Nothing ever changes in this crazy business.
An endless Groundhog Day loop of "smoke & mirrors".
I'm open to offers on my Fujitsu Stylistic 500 with Windows 3.1 plus AT&T EO440.
Cost an arm & a leg but never (or rarely) crashed.
Ok, so you criticise MS because they're announcing it this week with a (probably) actual launch date of Oct.
However, the first iPhone was announced in Jan 2007 - released in July that year.
The first iPad was announced Jan 2010 - released April 2010.
So, it's ok for Apple to announce things well in advance because they're, like, trendy, but oh no! Microsoft have to announce and release at the same time!
It was a business principle of Microsoft under Bill Gates to use FUD — fear, uncertainty and doubt. Someone would announce a product that might compete and MS would announce (but actually never produce) a better product: "Just wait for ours!" Remember Go Computing? There were even jokes about it. The was a problem with early PowerBooks catching fire and some wag said Microsoft's would not only catch fire, but would play the Star-Spangled Banner.
MS' problem is that people expect Office on a tablet but they certainly aren't going to pay full price for it.
So how do you stop companies using them as cheap (possibly remote) desktops? You could tie the tablet Office license to a full-blown Office license but that would kill the home market. "Free for non-commercial use" perhaps, or hobbled?
My guess is that for business use, people don't use tablets much (though they do want work email/calendar on a phone however so they can be reminded of things on the road or while walking to an appointment). If I were MS, I'd be pushing pc with a hi-res detachable screen and a teeny tiny atom inside. Sell that as a work laptop and users can take it home in the evening (perhaps just the screen) and have their tablet for free. Metro+free probably trumps ipad+expensive for most people.
If its the screen and battery which is expensive, re-use your work pc for that bit and get it for free. Beats BYOD for the company and beats paying out for an ipad for the employee.
> Sell that as a work laptop and users can take it home in the evening (perhaps just the screen) and have their tablet for free. Metro+free probably trumps ipad+expensive for most people.
Why do you think that it would be 'for free'. A touch screen is more expensive, a separate 'screen + atom' that separates from the base would be even more expensive. Microsoft would want two licences as there are two CPUs which would operate as separate devices.
Anyway most work computers that I come across are >20", I have 24". Not useful as a tablet, or for Metro. The reason that Surface has a keyboard is that most Windows x86 software is usable primarily with a keyboard and mouse, not with touch.
You could do well in the marketing dept at Microsoft, no worse than the current lot.
Download the spec sheet. Practically everything is undefined (including weight, thickness, screen resolution, battery life, price, included features. There is not a single photo of the product on surface.com. No wireless features are specified (apart from the fact it has an aerial). The video out port is a file format, and the screen technology is a software text rendering system.
In short, it's gibberish. This is just MIcrosoft yet again pretending its monopoly is something else. Trouble is, the client device monopoly is long gone. What Disty or retailer is going to buy this after Zune, and the RIM and HP tablet experiences?
Microsoft has had a good run with client computing, but this is just a remake of the last scene with Ballmer as Thelma and Sinofski as Louise.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
