Microsoft Surface Pro 4 Review

Re:Microsoft Surface Pro 4 Review by jameshart on Wednesday October 21, 2015 @03:31PM (#10427996)

If your product is being commoditized, the only way to seek margins is to fight commoditization. You do that by deifferentiating your products. And what laptop OEMs seem to have concluded is that differentiating on build quality/design/attention to detail/form factor wasn't an option.

And they continued to believe that even when Apple demonstrated conclusively that people would go out of their way to buy Apple hardware, rip off the Mac OS that they'd paid for, and install Linux/Windows on it.

Why is it obvious to Microsoft that the Surface Pro, or the SurfaceBook, is a valid addition to the PC hardware marketplace, but it wasn't obvious to any of the many competing OEMs?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Microsoft Surface Pro 4 Review by CountSessine on Wednesday October 21, 2015 @09:37PM (#10429951)

How profitable is the Surface for Microsoft?

Does Microsoft consider it a loss-leader reference design?

If it's been profitable, why hasn't anyone else in the PC space copied it?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Microsoft Surface Pro 4 Review by josefresco on Thursday October 22, 2015 @07:53AM (#10431657)

I believe (don't quote me on this) Microsoft is closing in on a billion (1) dollars in annual revenue from Surface. Not sure how much is "profit" but someone who follows earning more closely might be able to clarify.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Microsoft Surface Pro 4 Review by CountSessine on Friday October 23, 2015 @06:39PM (#10441619)

If the form factor is really that successful, I wonder why no one else is copying it? The Surface itself is made by a Taiwanese company named Pegatron, which is a division of Asus - so it's even being made by an established PC hardware company.

[ Parent | on HN ]