As recently as last year Microsoft was singing the praises of being able to kinda-sorta-use desktop software on a tablet and pushing the notion that things without desktop operating systems were 'consumption' devices, at best.
So, yes, their sudden reversal on what people want in a tablet is worth noting and easily justifies the same kind of quips and barbs that people lob at Apple over Jobs' similar reversals [1].
And it's pretty easy to be ahead of the curve on blending mobile and desktop operating systems when Microsoft is the only party who sees a problem to be solved in the first place. [2]
Because this entire concept -- that people want both -- comes apart at the seams about a month after you've owned an Apple or Android tablet. [3]
Simply: there's no user-facing problem being solved here.
People use tablets for what they're great at and desktop PCs for what they're great at. And no-one who's ever put their tablet down to use their laptop is looking at that Microsoft Surface tablet and saying "this will mean I don't have to put the tablet down for these tasks anymore". [4]
Microsoft is attempting to solve it's own problem with this blending concept and the degree to which this tablet succeeds, is going to strongly track the degree to which Windows stays out of the Metro experience [5].
[1] "No-one wants a widget." (Smash cut to 18 months later) "Introducing Apple's new iWidget!"
[2] That Windows is irrelevant in a growing computing market.
[3] And I say that as someone who has been pro-tablet for a decade and only grudgingly gave Apple's "big iPod" approach a chance.
[4] At best, the typing-heavy market is saying "I wonder how long it will take someone to make an iPad keyboard case that slick."
[5] Metro is a unique, interesting and a refreshing change from Apple's icon grid. And I've heard far more praise for it from the design folks that get written off as Apple fanboys, than I have from the Windows crowd who generally echoed Microsoft's 'consumption' FUD.
Microsoft's Surface looks like (for me) it could replace both the ipad and my macbook. It isn't a consumption device- it runs a full operating system. I could remote in to work from anywhere, attach it to a monitor if I wanted to work at home, and easily carry it around. It provides the convenience of a tablet, while allowing real work to be done. It even comes in pretty colors.
Apple wants me to own a phone, a music player, a tablet, and a laptop all to do separate things in separate places. This isn't necessary.
This is not a reversal of Microsoft's position- it's the logical next step.
Things always have a way of looking like what we want them to, before we get a chance to see them. I know how it works; I spent a lot of time waiting, hoping and grumbling about Windows tablets.
And what I see here, is an ARM tablet that has a real shot as a tablet - provided the Windows side stays out of the way.
And a hand-waved x86 tablet that may or may not be notably improved over last year's Windows tablets.
From that, you seem to be hoping the best of the ARM tablet (size/battery/usability) is implicit in the x86 tablet or vice-versa (does the ARM tablet even allow keyboard/mouse style apps from third parties?).
And that's precisely what remains to be seen.
As a deeply invested Apple user, it is nice to see Msft finally making something I might want to use.
I think it's a pretty good strategy from that standpoint. Additionally, with the Intel version being compatible with desktop apps, this should fit in with the business (corporate) environment.
Of course, this is speculation, but I think it has a pretty good chance at being successful.
I disagree. I see no reason why my mom wouldn't want a single computer to use on a couch for browsing, and on a desk with mouse/keyboard for chatting or photo editing. This seems like an obvious convergence of 2 specialized devices. There are trade offs of course, but if they can deliver a good experience, I think users would be willing to trade the computing power of a desktop for a single all-in-one device.
The next obviously step is to have a phone that can replace all 3, with different docks. And once phone CPU gets powerful enough we will definitely see that.
Firstly, for anyone not already using at least prosumer photo-editing software, the latest iPad apps are preferred to desktop apps by everyone I've seen use them. So lightroom or photoshop users may not be satisfied, but most people looking to make a few standard adjustments are going to get the job done faster and easier by not putting that tablet down.
And for substantial amounts of text entry, sure, the keyboard is great. But you don't need traditional OSX/Windows style keyboard-mouse interfaces to handle a keyboard.
In terms of media consumption I do not miss anything with the tablet but I find myself so often getting up from the couch walking over to my desk to get some simple tasks done in software XY because traditional software still beats most apps.
Having all those software programs running on my tablet will be so amazing!
Apple also started blending elements of the iOS UI into OS X, such as multi-touch gestures over a year ago. Maybe MS will leapfrog them. Surface does look interesting, I'm not discounting it, but we'll have to see where Apple and Microsoft stand relative to each other when Surface actually ships.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_for_Pen_Computing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XP_Tablet_PC_Edition#Tablet_PC_...
Sure, there wasn't a marketing hysteria around PDAs, but they were a viable market of their own.
Tablet laptops were used by many people as well.
Windows tablets used to be more expensive than laptops, and Apple tablets are significantly less expensive than laptops.
Windows CE PDAs were also very expensive, about three or four times what a current smartphone costs.
So the tech was there, but their pricing made the market very small.
Asus MyPal (a relatively high-end PDA) was around $400 when I bought it. That is cheaper than modern high-end phones and roughly equal to the prices of mid-level phones.
The laptop I'm writing this from costs around $400 dollars as well. This is the price of the cheapest iPad.
Now they are doing the reverse: making a tablet interface to the disadvantage of the PC. The "all-in-one" interface for all types of devices and form factors will never work, because at best it's optimized only for one of them, and mediocre or poor for most of the others.
Then all the ARM devices (phones, tablets, etc) and also XBOX uses "Metro". Just Metro, no mentions of Windows. If people like it, THEN windows 8 could use parts of Metro or start to resemble it in a way. (In a manner similar to the "back to the mac" stuff in OSX Lion and Mountain Lion) If not, well they can still use windows for many years just like people stuck with XP and eventually there will be a windows 7+1 of some kind for them.
But by calling the phone OS windows phone 7 and by completely changing windows 8 people are in a panic. I can only imagine what their "enterprise" customers must be thinking.
Plus now the phone OS is "version 7" which coincides with the old pc-os style windows but it is the only thing actually using Metro and windows 8 has no mention of metro and is the only one that's new style.. so is 7 or 8 or 360 or 720 the number to associate with the new style? Should any number be associated with it? If not, then why _start_ the completely new phone OS at number 7? Why call the near complete break version 8? etc.
tl;dr: If they did a complete break and didn't call it Windows, then no one's first reaction would be "Jack of all trades, master of none."
The key for Surface is the integration with AD, with providing a "desktop" of sorts, and all the other bells and whistles people associate with Windows. Whether the Windows DNA can be successfully combined with a touch based interface is a problem, but at least MS is trying. Muddling along with their old-style tablet software would cede the market to iOS and Android.
Or make a proper Metro / tablet / touch oriented version of Office a priority. Yes it would be a lot of work, but they can throw nearly limitless resources at it.
When you're building a piece of software you can choose to give it a metro-style UI, a classical desktop UI, or both. That way, your application works across desktops, slates, and WP8 phones. IE10 for example can be run as a full-screen metro app, or as a 'classic' desktop application.
The start menu has been replaced by a full-screen view with live tiles. And really, that's all there is to it; it's just a fancy full-screen start menu. You toggle it with the windows key, and you can quickly search for something just by typing. Live tiles are pretty handy to give you a quick overview of mail, world clocks, events, appointments, etc - much like OSX widgets.
These 'surface' slates, as well as desktops and laptops will run Windows 8 (both x86 and ARM varieties). Windows Phone 8 is just another flavor of that. I'm assuming in the near future, phones will even be able to run the desktop environment by docking to an external monitor, keyboard, and mouse.
I like Metro quite a bit.
Alas, I can't suspend disbelief and trust that this time Microsoft will remain committed to their latest greatest new thing, not lose interest and wander off in a few years, and not screw all the developers who bought into the latest pyramid scheme.
I think a lot of other people like Metro too.
I just attended an designer graduate student thesis project gallery exhibit whatever. 2/3rds of the UIs were strongly Metro-esque. Some very cool designs. I have no doubt Metro will spawn copycats.
But with Windows 8, every touch gesture or feature is baked in intelligently to keyboard/trackpad use. Swiping between apps, bringing up charms, splitting the screen, selecting tiles on the start screen, etc etc. I think this will make a huge difference. Microsoft has an advantage here because W8 has been built simultaneously for all of these usage models, whereas Apple started with touch and is still tethered to a fingers-only UI basis.
I don't think people realize how big this announcement was.
Yes, MS is still a multi-billion dollar company and a good portion of their revenue is likely secure for years if not decades. But we are at a key juncture in computing here, as important as the mainframe/mini-computer to PC transition if not even more so. And if MS had just blundered on and made half-assed token efforts they would have forever set themselves into the wrong gear and they would have relegated their company to a different market and marketshare than dominating the mainstream PC market as they've done.
MS has made a big play, and it may be enough to keep them in the game and revitalize their brand image. Time will tell.
Disclosure : I own a One X. I waited for the SIII announcement but the minute I saw the SIII i ordered my One X.
We are better than this, people.
Native unobfuscated desktop experience? Check. Pro drawing with stylus? Check. Multi-touch for slacking around? Check. Power for development? Check.
Personally, I'll just check the specs and price on this one and compare them to my needs, as I always do with any device I own.
The iPad gave long battery life, a comfortable form-factor, solid usability and reliability, an impossibly low price point for such high-end hardware, and most importantly it was a tablet above all else. Every app becomes the machine. That's entirely different than carrying a desktop around in an iPad-sized box.
Be careful if you think this is simply dumbing down a desktop, because it shows you're missing the point.
They combined that with their amazing manufacturing and engineering prowess and created a real winner.
From my perspective, the iPad is a dumbed down device. I only have access to the underlying operating system via API, don't have an ability to directly access shared corporate resources that are interesting to me, and cannot run arbitrary software without alot of hassle.
Dumbed-down devices are fine -- i own and love my iPad. But they're fine until you need to do something that the vendor doesn't want you to do, and Apple is a vendor who likes to define a single "one true path" to do many things.
And the Internet goes crazy about it. An iPad-killer at last, hooray!
EDIT: And of course the real question: will it ship with Office included? Or will Office for it cost more than the device itself? And how much cannibalization of their own software revenues will MS accept?
They probably are, yes. It's still far from clear that that's something that anyone wants.
No, it's merely another try to bite into its market. Microsoft had tablets before the iPad too, but not like that.
Yes, it's very similar to the iPad in many ways. But other than some of the marketing, it doesn't seem to fall any closer to Apple than any of the Android tablets we've been seeing for the last year.
That's because those are already too close.
They're absolutely ahead of the curve with the blending of mobile and desktop operating systems, something which I am extremely happy they are doing, and this is absolutely the logical design choices someone in that position would make.
Ahead of what curve?
They FINALLY have a me-too mobile phone platform, but with horrible market reach, and they are updating their OS into an old (Windows)/new(Metro) mixed UI monstrosity, generally met with "Metro is kinda nice, but what where they thinking?" reviews.
Yes, it's very similar to the iPad in many ways. But other than some of the marketing, it doesn't seem to fall any closer to Apple than any of the Android tablets we've been seeing for the last year. In fact, the metro UI (extreme minimalism) is pretty drastically different from Apple's style (extreme detail). Apple phased out the bold color designs years ago. (And don't feed me the "Microsoft is just really slow at copying" nonsense - it's clearly as much an original design as any.)
A lot of the arguments against it are the sort of arguments Samsung fought against in its lawsuit with Apple. The result of that was a totally unique product, and an awful one. (http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/05/04/the-samsung-galaxy-s...)