Microsoft's cheapest Surface tablet won't cost $1K after all

Re:Microsoft's cheapest Surface tablet won't cost $1K after all by Karunamon on Friday July 27, 2012 @03:51PM (#4303302)

Below $1k was a given anyways. Microsoft has said repeatedly that it would be competitively priced with the iPad.

$1,000 for a new and unknown tablet is anything but competitive.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Microsoft's cheapest Surface tablet won't cost $1K after all by mc32 on Friday July 27, 2012 @04:54PM (#4303536)

I'm not sure that was a given for me.

I would pay that for a tablet that did more than surf the web and play video and games. So, yes, if it was only going to match the capabilities of an iPad but have a different (Metro) interface, then yes, it would have to be priced on par with the iPad. But if it does more and integrates with the enterprise, I think 1,000 is not uncompetitive, given the possible advantages.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Microsoft's cheapest Surface tablet won't cost $1K after all by wklauss on Friday July 27, 2012 @05:47PM (#4303743)

You could argue that the iPad does much more than surf the web and play videogames. It's a matter of how you use it and how well is integrated in your workflow.

I know plenty of medical staff who are receiving training now to use iPads as the sole computing device in the hospital, for example. Same for a lot of financial companies.

Microsoft is trying to sell the idea that you can have the best of both worlds (traditional PCs and tablets) without sacrifices but its simply not true. Something's gotta give. In the case of Surface I expect a lot of frustration trying to use a standard windows app on a small touchscreen. And if you are going to connect the device to an external monitor, keyboard and mouse, you might as well have a small desktop PC.

this is not new, either. Microsoft has tried time and again, first with TabeltPCs, then the overhyped UMPCs (remember those?) and its always hitting the same walls.

If you are going to do a big change in the paradigm you have to have the balls to do it completely and take the advantages that switching to a "pure" tablet experience can offer. Leave bloated software behind, leave all the legacy support, etc...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Microsoft's cheapest Surface tablet won't cost $1K after all by freehunter on Friday July 27, 2012 @08:18PM (#4304180)

In the case of Surface I expect a lot of frustration trying to use a standard windows app on a small touchscreen. And if you are going to connect the device to an external monitor, keyboard and mouse, you might as well have a small desktop PC

So don't buy the x86 version. The ARM version doesn't have the desktop, so there's no complaining about how you foolishly installed non-touch apps and now you can't use them easily.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Microsoft's cheapest Surface tablet won't cost $1K after all by easp on Saturday July 28, 2012 @07:03PM (#4306852)

Well then, you really aren't getting the best of both worlds, are you. Might as well by an iPad.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Microsoft's cheapest Surface tablet won't cost $1K after all by freehunter on Saturday July 28, 2012 @11:42PM (#4307450)

Might as well by an iPad

Unless an iPad isn't what you want. There are other selling points for a Windows 8 tablet than "runs desktop apps that you won't like using". That was the selling point for Windows XP and 7 tablets.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Microsoft's cheapest Surface tablet won't cost $1K after all by taylodl on Friday July 27, 2012 @05:28PM (#4303674)

My iPad integrates with the enterprise. Doing it right now as a matter of fact, and I work for a conservative Fortune 200 company with stringent, U.S. Federal Government mandated, security requirements. My iPad has become my main mobile machine at work, and with the exception of reading HN, I do real work with it - not just web surfing.

And Androids need not apply. We stopped supporting them. Too many security issues as a result of their divergent platform.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Microsoft's cheapest Surface tablet won't cost $1K after all by mc32 on Friday July 27, 2012 @06:18PM (#4303841)

I should have been clearer. I meant to say that it would integrate with something like the AD structure out of the box, GPOs and such. I know there are enterprise mgmt kits for ipads and so on. But if this integrated into an existing ecosystem, it'd make a good case for those extra hundred(s) of dollars (given it would also run the apps people are used to in the ent.)

In any event, I'm not saying that a Surface would be _the_ system in the ent. All I'm saying is that given its legacy and avant capabilities, the extra price is justifiable, to me. For you an ipad is the perfect solution, there is no problem with that.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Microsoft's cheapest Surface tablet won't cost $1K after all by gddr on Friday July 27, 2012 @05:40PM (#4303721)

You know you can buy tablets with Windows 7 today right? It does not have a touch-optimized interface but you can run any program on it, and you might even be able to dual-boot Android.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Microsoft's cheapest Surface tablet won't cost $1K after all by taylodl on Friday July 27, 2012 @06:20PM (#4303845)

That's a good point: you can buy Windows 7 tablets today and yet Apple owns the tablet market. We can only reasonably assume Microsoft considers their current tablet strategy a failure and are seeking to rectify the situation with Surface and Windows 8.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Microsoft's cheapest Surface tablet won't cost $1K after all by Wheen on Friday July 27, 2012 @05:46PM (#4303742)

I have a friend who claims his aunt (Who works of MS) said that it would cost $1k (This was literally the day of the announcement, too). He has been rather reliable in the past, but it should still be taken with a grain of salt, since I was given no context.

[ Parent | on HN ]