The closest responsive touch screen you can buy today is a 27" Wacom Cintiq, which is $2,299 without a computer, and both lower-resolution (2560x1440 vs 4500x3000) and smaller (27" vs 28") than the Surface Studio.

So if you assume that about $2,300 of the device's costs go to the display and touch screen, you're paying ~$700 for the actual machine driving that display, which isn't a great value, but isn't bad at all.

A terrible value for people who aren't interested in the display, but not bad for people who are.

~$700 gets you a pretty basic computer with 965m, you can build a desktop with gtx 1070 for 700$ to power a wacom display. And you will be able to upgrade it in the future, with Studio you are stuck with a 965m for $3000. And if you are getting a 980m for $4200 that leaves you with a $1900 to build a computer for Wacom, which can be way more powerful than 980m...

I think Microsoft should have sell that monitor by itself, but I guess this way they could not shovel win10 updates down your throat so it is not a good option for them...

= 4-5000, with a shitty box and shitty experience and you get none of the engineering that went into the product.

Plz continue dreaming up dev boxes that only devs could love. Feel free to throw in some glowing cold cathode lights, too.

Core i7 PC with Gtx 1080: ~$1750 [2]

= $4050 for a much more powerful machine and $150 cheaper + upgradable

[1] - https://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=1113...

[2] - https://pcpartpicker.com/b/f2qkcf

In before Google releases the "Google Cardboard Surface Studio edition" xD

Also I did not see any mention of pressure sensitivity on that Studio panel, if it does not have it - it's a major point to still choose Wacom.

This is non touch version. Pen + Touch is $2800 which is a better comparison. That Cintiq is 2560x1440 compared to 4500x3000 in Surface Studio.

and here is what someone who actually used both thinks about it:

"Tycho asked me to compare it to my Cintiq, and I told him that drawing on the Cintiq now felt like drawing on a piece of dirty plexiglass hovering over a CRT monitor from 1997"

https://www.penny-arcade.com/news/post/2016/10/26/the-surfac...

I have no idea what do you mean - I've been assembling my own workstation for last 20 years now thank you there is no magic involved in building a nice system. And I don't enjoy glow lights in my case. If you think people will buy 4k$ system just for looks you have to be kidding me.

I'm kind of confused here. You specifically don't have to look at your (other) monitor when using the cintiq, because the cintiq is also a monitor.

Isn't that also true for pretty much every computer except Apple's?

[1]https://www.tonymacx86.com/

I'm not familiar with latest prices in the US but I would say $700 gets you more something like an i5 + GTX1060 (and it has a much larger form-factor and you have to build it yourself, so probably it's not a fair comparison), but yeah the 1060 or even the new (and cheap) 1050 are still much better than the 965m

EDIT: NewEgg has this one that is prebuilt, 1060+i5, but it's a bit more than $700 (normal price $829, now on sale at $749) http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883230... so yeah, to get it within a $700 budget you would probably have to self-build.

As someone owning a full tower I don't think it's wise to cram all that desktop power in a stupidly small box, it's really adding cost and heat for the sake of looking good at the expense of performance, but that's what MS chose to do so comparisons should be kept fair. (I wouldn't buy the Studio for this very reason though, only the display itself).

I'd buy that monitor.

The easy way to shovel Windows 10 updates would be to make the product only compatible with Windows 10.

I believe it's designed to let you use your Surface as an external monitor with pen/touch support for another Windows 10 PC.

On slow strokes, you can the tracking between key points looses accuracy as if the signal between points becomes weak.

I have tried everything I can to correct the issue like changing the stylus battery, 100 point calibration and driver updates. I'm pretty much convinced that N-trig just cannot be compared with Wacom (even the iPad Pro does a better job)

However, there are programs (ClipPaint and Mischief are my prime examples) have built-in mouse smoothing which greatly reduces the jitter but means the drawing action lags behind by a second or so.

Whilst I'd like to have the absolute latest, cutting edge GPU from AMD/NVIDIA I also appreciate that sometimes last gen parts are cheaper, more reliable (having benefitted from refinement over the manufacturing run) and sometimes cooler running than what's new. I use a Mac (for the forseeable) because I'm quite happy to spend quite a bit extra on form and function over just absolute function.

I'm not the only one, just look at Apple's bottom line.

I think what Microsoft are doing here are going after Apple's (previously) target market, the so called pro user. Windows has typically been a value proposition so it will take them time and clearly ruffle the feathers of those who've built their own PCs and put Windows on top (I for one do that on my gaming PC).

This is not a gaming PC. It's aimed at the iMac crowd. Apple's alienating a lot of professionals who value form and function by focusing on purely form and I think props should go to Microsoft for being the only company (as far as I can see) who is not copying Apple and producing some incredibly innovative new form factors in a very staid sector - the pro workstation.

The problem is that it's not really that big a market. This machine is too expensive for general use, and has the disadvantage of Windows for professional use.

I think a lot of designers are going to be interested enough to look at it, but sales aren't going to be anywhere near iMac volumes.

And sensible people will wait for the inevitable reports of serious flaws. (As I've said before, I have absolutely no confidence that MS can execute competently in the consumer market. I wish that was simple prejudice, but it's actually years of bitter experience.)

I considered that too, that the market might be too small. Dell tried themselves to crack this market with some exquisite kit a few years back (see my links below). Sadly they canned those products and haven't revisited the market.

Whilst there has always been premium Apple kit, there's never really been premium Windows kit. I really do hope Microsoft persever and don't give up on this segment of the market. The first few years can be painful when pivoting but customers do sometimes reward patience.

> As I've said before, I have absolutely no confidence that MS can execute competently in the consumer market. I wish that was simple prejudice, but it's actually years of bitter experience.

Agreed! But I do recall the 90s when people said the same thing about Apple...

No company stays on top (or bottom) of the pile forever. I for one hope and look forward to Microsoft evolving and changing, as they must.

Dell Crystal monitor: http://www1.la.dell.com/vc/en/corp/peripherals/monitor_22cry...

Dell Adamo notebook: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dell_Adamo

iMac crowd is dropping half of that for a pretty desktop that runs fine - I can see that. I don't see a lot of people buying a 4k$ device because it looks pretty. At that price range I need to be able to use it at least two years down the road and this is already outdated before release. It's just priced waay too high considering how weak the HW is, I would definitely skip this until they do a hardware update.

They don't need a breakneck GPU - they need a device like this that gives them new, intuitive input options.

That said, for any kind of 3D development this hardware isn't up to snuff. Anyway, the device seems more targeted at 2D graphic designers.

But trying to draw on an 1200 dpi A3 canvas (unsurprisingly) doesn't really work very well. But if I were to use it professionally, some of the things I'd want to do was draw high resolution A2 to A0 prints.

I've yet to play much with photoshop, so I'm not sure how well it handles a modest 20 megapixel image.

For me using Clip Studio Paint seems best so far, as it has dedicated tablet mode UI and is responsive enough, thought 1200 dpi A3 will might be too much for it at times.

It's misplaced priorities due to lack of knowledge, not that they don't benefit from high-end hardware.

So, yes, you can get two, even three iMacs for the price of a Surface Studio, but the specs will be nowhere near the same between the two.

I've said this in this tread before - you don't dump 4k$ on a desktop for mobile performance - when you spend that kind of cash you probably really need a high end workstation - think of the mac pro use case - and this device doesn't cut it as that.

I did graphic work for many years and have worked with dozens of designers. None of them have ever been worried about specs. In fact the only person who even asked about them wanted a high end laptop so he could play video games on it at home.

I am unconvinced designers care about specs unless they're working on something specific that requires very high performance (which the majority would NOT be doing).

Says everyone that is still paying full price for a 3 year old MacBook Pro....

Not to say that Photoshop / Illustrator aren't being used. Sketch is also more beginner friendly.

Doing video editing, 3D at that resolution, VR, etc. are the kind of workloads you need a desktop machine for - this doesn't cut it.

This is in the price range of Mac Pro, you need to justify spending 3 or 4k $ on this machine - and it doesn't cover the Mac Pro use case at all. For the price of this machine you can buy a high end laptop that beats this on specs and utility (because it's portable) and a high end screen.

I mean I like the device and the screen - but no way in hell am I paying 4k$ for something that's outdated out of the factory - maybe on the next update.

"I am intimately familiar with how it feels to create things on these sorts of devices and the Studio honestly feels like a generational leap forward. If you are a digital artist and you are currently working on a Cintiq you have to go to a MS store and look at the Studio. I’ve always given you my honest take on this stuff and this time is no different even though I can’t think of anything bad to say. If you draw on computers the Surface Studio is something very special."

Pure SSDs only shine for gaming and compiling, and much more for the former than the later.

A machine where you're constantly shuffling for space is no fun.

The SSD impacts every single aspect of computer performance - from startup times, to application start times, to swap space speed, to reducing times when the computer is locked up loading from disk.

And these days, a 1 TB SSD can be had for around $300 USD - at which point, there is no obvious need for shuffling for space. Of course, if you are needing the 3 TB drives for video editing, that's fine. The surface studio specs say 1TB or 2TB - so even at such a high price, I find it really disappointing that it's not offering the 1 TB SSD (which is probably the first aftermarket change I would make if I bought one). For many 3D graphics pros, you would run the OS on a 512G SSD, and load the assets onto a larger 3TB hybrid drive or even better, a 10TB RAID array, for example, but you can't discount how much performance that SSD drive brings just for loading the OS and the software (Maya, or Adobe suite, etc)

Face it - any new machine today without an ssd is one where the manufacture is trying to claw back some profit.

This device has some pretty intense performance requirements for the form factor. Could we wait a bit for some hands-on with reviewers before saying MS botched it?

And yes the SSD's are not as fast as the latest m.2 drives, but are still miles ahead of any spinning drive. I'm not really sure what you are trying to say ... like a Ferrari is faster than a Tesla in Ludicrous mode, so ... go for an electric hybrid like a Toyota Prius? I know that the car analogy doesn't always work, but can you think about your reasoning? That a true M.2 SSD (which can be thousands of dollars) is faster than a last gen 1TB SSD in the 2.5 inch form factor, so therefore MS should use a spinning hybrid drive???

You can wait for a teardown, or you can use logic and common sense.

The only other choice is for MS to use a non standard size spinning platter, maybe around the old Compact Flash drive size - but in that case, there is absolutely no point - they should have just gone straight to M.2, especially for something in that form factor.

To be honest, current generation hybrid drives pair up a really slow 5400 rpm drive with some flash. Now it can still get good performance, but in the end, you're dealing with a hard drive from a few generations ago. Seagate had 7200rpm hybrid drives last generation, but they recently changed to 5400 rpm drives, which makes the drive kinda slow, even with the flash addition.

Microsoft may certainly have gone custom with custom parts, but I don't think they have the volume, even in the wildest expectations, to go against the now popular ssd juggernaunt that is overtaking all of the slim laptop (Apple, Lenovo, Dell, Razer, etc), small form factor embedded pc, and high performance pc space - for good reason. It just makes sense, the parts are really widely available, and people are expecting that type of performance.

Microsoft has a lot of money, but I'm not sure that's where they should spend their money. An SSD in m.2 size is expensive, but less expensive than getting all custom gear.

This is about thinking things through ....

The logical thing is to have a 512G M.2 nvme paired up with a 2TB regular spinning drive (at 2.5") and calling it a day.

That's I would go with for a deluxe, small form factor, graphics pro oriented machine. That's the sweet spot. And it's really easy to build with off the shelf parts like the Intel NUC as a base.

I am no longer a professional (as in, primary income) photographer, but I was and trying to keep all my work on the "right" drive was about as fun as weddings.

Btw sorry I said 2.5gb but that was mobile correcting 2.5in.

I'm not arguing for abstract systems, but for that specific build that Microsoft has put together - in that form factor, a hybrid drive takes up too much space and they are not offering 3TB+ versions where the hybrid drive would excel.

I'm criticizing that specific assembly of parts.

It's not. It's really not. There is no damn room.

It's the same with the MBA, it's the same with the Surface 4 and Surface. Hell, it's the same with every all-in-one now.

I'm trying to take you seriously here but you keep repeating this line that makes it sound like you have some deep and clever insight into a machine the press has barely touched, let alone teardown specialists. You're mad because it's not a full SSD on principle but you have no idea what the hot set size of the hybrid is. You've got a bone to pick with performance but Surface devices have always been forced to use custom configurations of hardware (e.g., every Surface Book has an unusual configuration of their video card that gives substantially better performance).

I think you're arguing based on theoretical specs and without knowing the domain. Unless you're an ex-Surface engineer with special insight, I don't see why anyone here should trust you about this given how you insist this is all stock parts and it's trivially verifiable that that's not the case.

SSDs (and preferably PCIe or NVMe) should be table stakes at a $2k price.

A lot of people here are talking as if they've actually tested these hybrid drives and found them wanting. Hybrid drives have an SSD-like component so as long as your working set fits in those and is relatively predictable, the performance difference is not noticeable.

This looks like an amazing experience, I'm just worried about performance in my workflow. That said, the future is bright.

http://www.techradar.com/reviews/pc-mac/pc-components/storag...

Hybrids are totally fine in a great majority of use cases. For this price I agree you might as well have thrown one in, but still, performance difference will be neglible.

As a dev I run an ssd because ides are shitty bloated awful pieces of crap (all of them tbh) they don't know how to run in memory and always spend time on file io.

Adobe CS suite ... that's a load of hot steaming garbage when you try to load it up.

They are one of the really bad culprits causing designers and graphics pro's to need fast SSD's.

Think having multiple copes of IntelliJ IDEA AND Eclipse running at the same time, and being saddled with poorly optimized code paths. (Because designers often need to run Photoshop and Illustrator, and sometimes Premiere as well for example, simultaneously)

In fact, I think photoshop on a code quality level (loading, optimizations) is worse than Eclipse by a factor of 2. Designers have been getting around this by throwing brute force processing power, gpu, and SSD's at it.

The image processing algorithms are top notch, that's why people buy it - but everything around it ... the ui, widgets, update framework, a ton of it is creaking old and really poorly maintained.

The screen.

Why chain it to mediocre, non-upgradeable hardware?

Tying it to the computer allows them to control the entire user experience including adding specialized software to take advantage of such an interesting screen. There is a reason Apple owns the full stack and why Microsoft and Google are trying to get into that space: it offers the best UX and ROI.

Works for Apple. Seems to be working so far for the "Smart TV" market.

I don't get it myself, but then I have not owned a completely "new" desktop in over 15 years, even though my desktop PC is full of modern components (and I'm fairly sure at this point, not a single piece that was in the original is left, including the case).

I'm not the type of person who thinks "Hm, I need more disk space. Guess I better throw out my PC, monitor and keyboard and buy a completely new system." but I think this is aimed at the segment of the market that thinks that way, or at least is willing to in order to get the new input/interaction features.

They probably went with the hybrid storage since PSD / illustration files take up an enormous amount of space. Unfortunately there's no such thing as git for design. The SSD would be appreciated, but once Adobe Photoshop or Illustrator is opened, SSD makes little difference.

From a feature aspect the surface dial seems pretty amazing. Ill be interested in trying it out at the store. The ability to go from desktop to working directly on it is also incredible. Cintiqs take up a lot of space...

Then you're not the target market.

What's more, when we're talking about the professional space it's like... it's quite normal to NOT have hyper-upgradable boxes with cutting edge hardware that isn't well supported by the current crop of editing tools. Cutting edge hardware is the product of Dentists and Software Engineers who fancy themselves a member of that space even though they're really not. Not unlike how professional photographers almost never ride the latest model release.

It seems like a lot of people here are thinking of this as a recreational gaming box for rich people. Surface machines in general perform poorly there.

I haven't really spent much time with nTrig based Surface models, but the Wacom in my Surface Pro 1 really sucks at the edges.

Re: price - I'm thinking the digitizer and screen is the whole reason for the price. It would be good if the box could be updated while keeping the screen.

$2,799.95 https://www.amazon.com/Wacom-Cintiq-27QHD-Creative-Display/d...

As for the rest of it, no designer cares about previous gen stuff - if they didn't they wouldn't have gone to macs in the first place.

If you are concerned with graphics performance, you are not their target market.

Courage.