Microsoft Answers Surface Pro Questions

[HardOCP News]

Microsoft took to the internet today to answer questions about the Surface Pro. Here's an example of the questions answered:

Q: Why didn't Microsoft simply provide a USB flash drive with the disk recovery image on it in the Surface Pro box to free up more disk space in the product?

A: "We could have done this, but then there would be a chance it would be lost. We give you the ability to make one if you choose and free up the space....."There ha(ve) also been questions about why including the recovery image by default. Ideally, you will never need your recovery image, however this is a choice we would prefer the customer to make vs. having the customer need the recovery image not realizing they needed to create one themselves."

 

[Cali3350]

Apple has been sending recovery usb sticks for a while now to great success. Sounds more to me like Microsoft just cheaping out a large amount.

 

[somecallmeTim]

Heh... I love the flame / troll wars in the comments.

From and engineering standpoint, I like the Surface. It has a lot of hidden potential and folks need to remember.. it is NOT an iPad or an Android tablet. It's the next step. The Q&A was pretty straight forward, but contained good information.

Being a fan of the ARM... looking forward to getting into one of these as time permits.

 

[timta2]

That's almost as ridiculous as the restore partitions on the same drives as the OS, that all of the manufacturers thought was a great idea, until your drive dies.

 

[Terminus]

2.0 will need better battery life

 

[odditory]

2.0 will need better battery life

With Haswell that should be likely.

 

[faugusztin]

Apple has been sending recovery usb sticks for a while now to great success. Sounds more to me like Microsoft just cheaping out a large amount.

I would like to know what are you talking about. Maybe i missed out, but my 2012 Mac Mini didn't had a recovery USB stick. Neither did have recovery/install DVD media.

The only option to get OS X if you don't want to buy OS X media for $30 and you didn't made your own is internet recovery. That is, if your network uses DHCP, is connected to internet and you can fit the few gigabytes you need to download in your data cap if you have one.

My previous 2011 13" Macbook Pro had at least install DVD media.

PS: For me, Microsoft and all their partners are too late. I needed something in November, so i bought an Acer Aspire S7. Even in January the number of tablets on the market was low (now i speak about my country, in US the situation was a bit different). I wanted a W8 tablet with Core i-something, but none of the manufacturers delivered. Maybe in 2-3 years, if i will feel the need to upgrade .

 

[wtburnette]

2.0 will need better battery life

If they can get better battery life with the same/similar performance and get the chassis a bit thinner I think it'll be a product that's in decent demand. Problem is, they have to get the price down to ~$800 with a type cover to really start selling. It looks like a good product, but not a fantastic product. It's simply priced too high when a comparable Ultrabook will do a better job for a similar price. I think if they could get the price down they'd see a much heavier adoption.

 

[Cali3350]

I would like to know what are you talking about. Maybe i missed out, but my 2012 Mac Mini didn't had a recovery USB stick. Neither did have recovery/install DVD media.

The only option to get OS X if you don't want to buy OS X media for $30 and you didn't made your own is internet recovery. That is, if your network uses DHCP, is connected to internet and you can fit the few gigabytes you need to download in your data cap if you have one.

My previous 2011 13" Macbook Pro had at least install DVD media.

PS: For me, Microsoft and all their partners are too late. I needed something in November, so i bought an Acer Aspire S7. Even in January the number of tablets on the market was low (now i speak about my country, in US the situation was a bit different). I wanted a W8 tablet with Core i-something, but none of the manufacturers delivered. Maybe in 2-3 years, if i will feel the need to upgrade .

I believe they only do it for airs since theres no disk drive. My mistake.

Not as if they havent shipped a hell of a lot of airs though.

 

[Budzman]

That's almost as ridiculous as the restore partitions on the same drives as the OS, that all of the manufacturers thought was a great idea, until your drive dies.

Hard drives never die especially ones from Seagate.

 

[Jaerb4]

If they can get better battery life with the same/similar performance and get the chassis a bit thinner I think it'll be a product that's in decent demand. Problem is, they have to get the price down to ~$800 with a type cover to really start selling. It looks like a good product, but not a fantastic product. It's simply priced too high when a comparable Ultrabook will do a better job for a similar price. I think if they could get the price down they'd see a much heavier adoption.

They mentioned a few times in the AMA that they've allowed the possibility of a battery keyboard dock, followed by lots of annoying 's, but no words on what that'll actually entail or the battery life gain.

They really don't need to get the price down though. This is an enterprise machine, not a general consumer device. What they need is a better keyboard and battery life.

 

[faugusztin]

I believe they only do it for airs since theres no disk drive. My mistake.

Same applies to Mac Mini, yet no flashdisk with OS X.

 

[pelo]

They really don't need to get the price down though. This is an enterprise machine, not a general consumer device. What they need is a better keyboard and battery life.

No it isn't. It's targeted at average consumers. I agree that the enterprise segment is the one that bears to benefit from this type of device, but that's not what Microsoft is after with these things. The response in the AMA shows that much; the surface pro is meant to be a tablet and laptop all in a single package. Independent scaling doesn't work, an absolute must if you're going to dock it, but then again there is no docking option either. These things are requirements in the business/enterprise segment.

Microsoft's next foray into x86 high-powered x86 tablets will certainly offer better battery life, but the price isn't going to go down. Haswell will bring battery life and perf-per-watt improvements, but it's also going to cost quite more.

I'd like to see MS separate their win32/legacy environment from their WinRT stuff completely. I have a feeling that's likely to happen sometime in the future, but only after the Metro store gets some much needed developer attention. Developers seem to be catering more to the BlackBerry 10 than they do Metro and Win8 right now.

 

[heatlesssun]

Independent scaling doesn't work, an absolute must if you're going to dock it, but then again there is no docking option either. These things are requirements in the business/enterprise segment.

I agree that scaling issues need to addressed but there are some other considerations. You can increase the font sizes of many elements in the Windows desktop shell without increasing scaling that can also increase the size of other elements such was the windows controls. It would depend on the apps one wants to use on the desktop with touch but there is also a pen for finer control. And of course there is no issue with the scaling of Modern UI apps which one would tend to use more with touch anyway.

I'd like to see MS separate their win32/legacy environment from their WinRT stuff completely. I have a feeling that's likely to happen sometime in the future, but only after the Metro store gets some much needed developer attention. Developers seem to be catering more to the BlackBerry 10 than they do Metro and Win8 right now.

Another possibility is that the desktop in Windows RT gets opened up to native ARM desktop applications. The current design of Windows 8/RT doesn't show any technical intent to dump the desktop and I don't think that the desktop is going anywhere anytime soon. We'll know more about the future of the desktop in the next major Windows release, maybe even the rumored Windows Blue update. If the desktop gets better touch support, scaling, etc. then I think the desktop will be around for a while. If on the other hand the desktop gets little or no treatment then maybe it will fade away, at least for Windows RT. But that would me some major changes to the Windows RT API to better support desktop like applications.

 

[pelo]

It doesn't need to support desktop applications. The entire point of WinRT was to move away from the baggage of win32 and legacy in an attempt to cater to the mass market rather than the aging PC. With their own Metro store and new API, Microsoft would have the ability to wrest control over the entire environment much like Apple or Google does (more Apple than Google, but you get the point). The 20-30% fee for apps certainly helps make the transition as well.

The only desktop applications that WinRT got was Office, and even that lacks the full features of it's x86 counterpart. I can't think of anything outside of Office to make WinRT more appealing for the enterprise or users who still need win32 legacy support. This notion that WinRT will somehow support desktop like applications only means Microsoft ends up in the same mess it's in now with respect to performance tax, wasted storage space and skyrocket pricing.

 

[heatlesssun]

It doesn't need to support desktop applications. The entire point of WinRT was to move away from the baggage of win32 and legacy in an attempt to cater to the mass market rather than the aging PC. With their own Metro store and new API, Microsoft would have the ability to wrest control over the entire environment much like Apple or Google does (more Apple than Google, but you get the point). The 20-30% fee for apps certainly helps make the transition as well.

The Win32 API is still quite powerful and is used for literally millions of applications, there's no simple way to just move away from it with WinRT, especially considering the current limitations of WinRT. It simply can't be used to develop the types of apps that Win32 can currently. However this goes, WinRT would have to see some very major changes before it can even begin to be used to develop the breadth and depth of current Win32 applications.

The only desktop applications that WinRT got was Office, and even that lacks the full features of it's x86 counterpart. I can't think of anything outside of Office to make WinRT more appealing for the enterprise or users who still need win32 legacy support. This notion that WinRT will somehow support desktop like applications only means Microsoft ends up in the same mess it's in now with respect to performance tax, wasted storage space and skyrocket pricing.

WinRT is new and at least in its first iteration it would have been pretty tricky to open up the desktop to 3rd party desktop apps. Much of what it missing in Office RT compared to the desktop relates to extensibility that is very much dependent on x86 architecture like add-ins which would require installing desktop software.

We'll just have to see where WinRT and the desktop go next to know how this will play out. I think this notion that Microsoft wants to just move everything over to the Windows Store to get a cut of the sales is unrealistic. Most of the apps in the Store are free as are may Windows desktop apps and the idea that you're just going to get all the necessary apps moved over when WinRT doesn't even support what many migrated desktop apps would need can't even happen in the first place.

There's just so much work and so many technical issues involved in making all desktop apps Metro apps that I can't see how it would happen. Just because Microsoft gets a 20% to 30% cut isn't going to encourage developers to take on this monstrous effort. I could see Windows RT dropping the desktop UI but tablets are going to get more a more desktop like in the future if they are going to become used more for productivity.

There are simply too many questions, too much effort, too many unknowns at this time to make any kind of reasonable analysis of how this is going to go forward.

 

[pelo]

The Win32 API is still quite powerful and is used for literally millions of applications, there's no simple way to just move away from it with WinRT, especially considering the current limitations of WinRT. It simply can't be used to develop the types of apps that Win32 can currently. However this goes, WinRT would have to see some very major changes before it can even begin to be used to develop the breadth and depth of current Win32 applications.

Given that WinRT is Microsoft's entrance into the mobile consumer market, my point is that it won't ever get the breadth and depth of current win32 applications. It's not that it would require a lot of work on Microsoft's part, but rather the extra baggage to allow for something like that isn't worth the negatives. If MS attempts to make WinRT a replacement for win32 legacy and allow for win32-like software then all they've done is bring it back full circle. The price will still be sky high, the OS and the driver ordeal will be just as bad (and probably even worse), and the hardware required to run the software will be more expensive, hotter, and hungrier than competing platforms. There's a legitimate reason why people aren't flocking to Clover Trail tablets and why the Surface Pro is a niche product. Either you don't get enough power to handle everything you throw at it, or you get enough power but you pay a very high price tag and suffer with respect battery life.

WinRT was meant as a step away from all of that. It then makes no sense to take win32 and transplant it onto WinRT.

There's a legitimate reason why people aren't flocking to Clover Trail tablets and why the Surface Pro is a niche product. Either you don't get enough power to handle everything you throw at it, or you get enough power but you pay a very high price tag and suffer with respect battery life. The legacy baggage really is baggage. It's nice for those of us who still rely on win32 software, but then we also require the extra processing power, ports, a keyboard, a mouse, and a whole host of driver compatibility. These are things that make the OS fat and the platform more expensive. Coincidentally, these are also the things that the average consumer has been moving away from.

There's just so much work and so many technical issues involved in making all desktop apps Metro apps that I can't see how it would happen. Just because Microsoft gets a 20% to 30% cut isn't going to encourage developers to take on this monstrous effort. I could see Windows RT dropping the desktop UI but tablets are going to get more a more desktop like in the future if they are going to become used more for productivity.

MS has shown that they're looking to become a very Apple-like company; which is to say, MS is looking to provide everything from the hardware to the software and attempt to give the user a very "clean" experience. That endeavor is at complete odds with what a PC, namely a Windows PC, is meant to represent.
- WinRT doesn't allow you to grab applications elsewhere (you can, but it's certainly not advised). This makes sense for a consumer tablet, but for a PC it's absolutely backwards.
- WinRT doesn't provide a large list of hardware compatibility - have a look at various forums with respect to printer/scanner and other peripheral compatibility issues. For enterprise and business users, that makes these tablets a no-go.
- WinRT also lacks backwards compatibility with anything legacy related.
- We've been over the scaling issues and the external monitor problems, but for enterprise/business and productivity uses that's a huge negative for these products.

TL;DR version: WinRT was never designed to replace a PC for enterprise, business, or productivity folks. You can probably stretch this statement to include Windows 8 due to its clearly steep learning curve. For big businesses who roll in new machines + OSes by the thousands, Win8 is an operating system that adds additional cost due to training and lost productivity and familiarity.

There are simply too many questions, too much effort, too many unknowns at this time to make any kind of reasonable analysis of how this is going to go forward.

I disagree with the unknowns bit. I think it's quite clear MS is looking to rebrand itself by veering away from its enterprise and productivity roots in order to garner more attention in the consumer space that has turned its eyes elsewhere.

 

[pelo]

What I'm saying is, there's no reason why 95%+ of average consumers need to pay a high price tag for hardware they don't need, and software they won't use just to get a "PC" that runs win32/legacy applications. They're content with having a single PC sitting in a corner somewhere that gets upgraded once a decade and gets little use. They can buy a cheaper device with hardware that fits their usage pattern and an app store that's packaged into a neat, easy and idiot proof manner.

For the rest of us, we won't put up with a locked-in approach like you see in tablets. A simple Snapdragon S4 isn't enough processing power. 8GB RAM isn't going to be enough. DPI scaling issues are something we want to avoid like the plague. We also absolutely need the OS to support as broad a range of hardware as physically possible at the expense of storage space, which we can always upgrade ourselves.

Although the Surface Pro and Surface RT are supposed to bridge these disconnects, they're ultimately not going to succeed, imo. The average user doesn't need a >$250 Intel ULV to play Angry Birds or lolfacebook. Likewise, the smaller portion of the population - like the one that congregates here - isn't going to be served with a "half-and-half" device or a tablet.

The divide isn't something that is going to be bridged, but rather one that's going to widen to a chasm in a short amount of time. It would serve well for MS to split their OS in two in order to fulfill the needs of both sets of users well rather than compromise on both ends.

 

[heatlesssun]

I disagree with the unknowns bit. I think it's quite clear MS is looking to rebrand itself by veering away from its enterprise and productivity roots in order to garner more attention in the consumer space that has turned its eyes elsewhere.

Veering away for the enterprise? Not at all. Trying to become more consumer oriented with Windows, sure.

 

[pelo]

Veering away *from* enterprise. How else do you explain Win8? No big business is going to roll out Win8. No big business will buy any touch-based anything to replace their laptops and desktops. They sure as hell aren't going to go through the trouble of having to retrain their employees to use Win8 when they just got done rolling out Win7.

So, yes, MS is most certainly veering away from the enterprise sector.

 

[heatlesssun]

Veering away *from* enterprise. How else do you explain Win8? No big business is going to roll out Win8. No big business will buy any touch-based anything to replace their laptops and desktops. They sure as hell aren't going to go through the trouble of having to retrain their employees to use Win8 when they just got done rolling out Win7.

So, yes, MS is most certainly veering away from the enterprise sector.

And no enterprise was going to roll out Office 2007 because the ribbon dumbed down the UI and would require massive retraining and yet they did, plenty did. Tablets and touch are being focused more than ever at business and the enterprise. Adding these features while retaining the Windows 7 desktop could be considered more of a play for the enterprise than for the consumer space.

 

[SkribbelKat]

Veering away for the enterprise? Not at all. Trying to become more consumer oriented with Windows, sure.

They weren't interested in selling to consumers before? What about all the "Home" branded OS releases, Live, Hotmail, MSN, Skype, Xboxes, etc. I don't know how much more consumer oriented they can reasonably get considering. I guess they could start making GameBoy type stuff or maybe Microsoft branded seeds for gardening. That'd be pretty awesome. Microsoft Planter XP could be incompatible with Microsoft Seeds 2013 because Planter XP doesn't have a finger friendly lip on the edge that Seeds 2013 need to have in order to support Microsoft Trellis Xpress. Then we could all complain that nVidia's latest Pumpkin x960 Garden-p33n Edition doesn't have Planter XP soil support and won't grow in native dirt, forcing people to acquire hacked, unsupported dirt from 3rd party suppliers or buy the new Planter 8 which people seem to dislike because they think it takes longer to water and isn't as easy to roll from one end of the porch to another since the wheel design was changed to compete with Apple's iGro.

 

[pelo]

There's a steeper learning curve for these folks with Win8 than there is with their iPads iPhones and OS X. And the devices that Microsoft is selling don't have enterprise focused features, the DPI scaling is a detriment, the multi-monitor support is poor, touch-based input is a far distant second to a mouse, a physical keyboard is always preferred, etc., etc.

Win8, the Surface Pro and Surface RT aren't enterprise products. Sorry, bud.

 

[heatlesssun]

They weren't interested in selling to consumers before? What about all the "Home" branded OS releases, Live, Hotmail, MSN, Skype, Xboxes, etc. I don't know how much more consumer oriented they can reasonably get considering.

I said more consumer friendly, things like touch and an app store are things that most consumers are familiar with on their phones and tablets these days.

 

[SkribbelKat]

I said more consumer friendly, things like touch and an app store are things that most consumers are familiar with on their phones and tablets these days.

Oh, so does that mean I shouldn't expect to switch from Burpee to the Microsoft EcoSystem for Gardeners anytime soon? I was looking for a Q1 2014 release so I could get an early start on things using Microsoft SunLamp 365 and then go right into Planter 8 after the last frost.

 

[heatlesssun]

There's a steeper learning curve for these folks with Win8 than there is with their iPads iPhones and OS X.

Far to broad of a generalization without looking at specific tasks or activities and there are plenty of people even in this forum that say that picking up Windows 8 wasn't that big of a deal to them. It's just as plausible to say that Windows 7 has a steeper learning curve than iOS as well. It's not like you have to deal multiple monitors, resizable windows, display settings or a Control Panel in iOS.

And the devices that Microsoft is selling don't have enterprise focused features, the DPI scaling is a detriment, the multi-monitor support is poor, touch-based input is a far distant second to a mouse, a physical keyboard is always preferred, etc., etc.

Win8, the Surface Pro and Surface RT aren't enterprise products. Sorry, bud.

Things like logging into a domain or Group Policies or running enterprise controlled Metro app stores or running Outlook or Win32 enterprise desktop apps are enterprise focused features?

 

[pelo]

Far to broad of a generalization without looking at specific tasks or activities and there are plenty of people even in this forum that say that picking up Windows 8 wasn't that big of a deal to them. It's just as plausible to say that Windows 7 has a steeper learning curve than iOS as well. It's not like you have to deal multiple monitors, resizable windows, display settings or a Control Panel in iOS.

Things like logging into a domain or Group Policies

Maybe, but that depends on how it's utilized and what's needed.

or running enterprise controlled Metro app stores

No. There's absolutely no need for any stores whatsoever on these devices. Control over software has been around for well over a decade.

or running Outlook or Win32 enterprise desktop apps are enterprise focused features?

As far as I'm aware, Win7 does all of that just as well. Further, it doesn't require employees to fumble about with Metro and charms bars. It supports multi-monitor much better, has better driver support and better out-of-the-box support for hardware, both OS side and hardware manufacturer provided.

 

[heatlesssun]

No. There's absolutely no need for any stores whatsoever on these devices. Control over software has been around for well over a decade.

But stores are how apps get installed on tablets, even iOS and Android devices in the enterprise. You don't just download an exe file and run it.

As far as I'm aware, Win7 does all of that just as well. Further, it doesn't require employees to fumble about with Metro and charms bars. It supports multi-monitor much better, has better driver support and better out-of-the-box support for hardware, both OS side and hardware manufacturer provided.

But the reason one would "fumble" with Metro and Charms is to get better tablet operation on a tablet. At any rate it's just another one Metro sucks no it doesn't debates. Some like and have no problem, so don't, very much like the ribbon. In the end I think most people adjust to it if that's what's in front of them. As for multiple monitor support, many people even here have said that Windows 8 from the desktop perspective works better out of the box with independent multiple monitors 7 because of the enhancements to the task bar. As for drivers, a three year old OS has more mautre drivers than a three month old one, fair enough, nothing new. Drivers always improve over time.

 

[pelo]

But stores are how apps get installed on tablets, even iOS and Android devices in the enterprise. You don't just download an exe file and run it.

I was referring to Win8 as a whole. The Surface Pro still allows you to install whatever you want in the legacy environment, so I have no idea what role Metro and its app store would play in any of this. Wasted space? Another icon to ignore?

But the reason one would "fumble" with Metro and Charms is to get better tablet operation on a tablet. At any rate it's just another one Metro sucks no it doesn't debates. Some like and have no problem, so don't, very much like the ribbon. In the end I think most people adjust to it if that's what's in front of them. As for multiple monitor support, many people even here have said that Windows 8 from the desktop perspective works better out of the box with independent multiple monitors 7 because of the enhancements to the task bar. As for drivers, a three year old OS has more mautre drivers than a three month old one, fair enough, nothing new. Drivers always improve over time.

Not having the ability to scale resolutions independently isn't an improvement, it's a huge step backwards. The hot corners debacle is yet another fumble with respect to multi-monitor support. The task bar was the only useful feature added for multi-monitor support. Everything else was a huge step backwards or utterly useless.

And the DPI improvements have amounted to adding two more scaling settings that work with the Surface Pro and Surface RT's recommended % settings. That's it. Quite literally nothing else.

Neat, huh?

 

[heatlesssun]

I was referring to Win8 as a whole. The Surface Pro still allows you to install whatever you want in the legacy environment, so I have no idea what role Metro and its app store would play in any of this. Wasted space? Another icon to ignore?

Because Metro apps are what make Windows 8/RT work well with touch. Metro apps are often criticized as not appropriate for the desktop however they make a lot of on a device that at least some of the time will be used as touch tablet.

Not having the ability to scale resolutions independently isn't an improvement, it's a huge step backwards.

How is this a step backwards as you can't do this in prior versions of Windows either?

The hot corners debacle is yet another fumble with respect to multi-monitor support. The task bar was the only useful feature added for multi-monitor support. Everything else was a huge step backwards or utterly useless.

The hot corners don't work as well on the on the middle edges of multiple monitor setup as they do on a single screen. However, you never had the in the box ability to bring up the Start Menu on any screen or go to an app on a specific screen by selecting it from a thumbnail on that screen.

Also devices like track pads and touch mice make dealing with the new UI much easier. Windows 8 works much better with gestures and those gestures can make things quicker and easier than even in Windows 7. Why go through all of the mouse movement of constant clicking on the Start Button when a simple gesture from any where on any screen will bring up the Start Screen?

Windows 8 is different and sure there are things that need to be improved but I simply don't see how it's any less productive on the desktop when you learn what's there and how to use it.

And the DPI improvements have amounted to adding two more scaling settings that work with the Surface Pro and Surface RT's recommended % settings. That's it. Quite literally nothing else.

Neat, huh?

Which isn't a step backwards like you were saying earlier. More needs to be done but still not going backwards.

 

[pelo]

It is backwards. Microsoft is pushing their own devices, devices with default DPI scaling jacked up because of the small diagonal screen size and high resolutions, yet the same devices lack proper distinct scaling and external monitor support. Add the lackluster nVidia and AMD driver support to this mix as well and now you've got issues with both resolution and DPI scaling.

Windows 8 is different and sure there are things that need to be improved but I simply don't see how it's any less productive on the desktop when you learn what's there and how to use it.

When learning to use it means losing money, you decide against using it in the first place. When you've got to worry about issues like the ones I noted in this thread, you quickly reach the conclusion that it's not worth the trouble. It either works and works well or it won't be used. This is enterprise we're talking about, not the average schmuck sitting on his toilet playing with his new gadget.

 

[heatlesssun]

It is backwards. Microsoft is pushing their own devices, devices with default DPI scaling jacked up because of the small diagonal screen size and high resolutions, yet the same devices lack proper distinct scaling and external monitor support. Add the lackluster nVidia and AMD driver support to this mix as well and now you've got issues with both resolution and DPI scaling.

Again, how is this backwards when Windows 7 has the same issues with DPI scaling on the desktop? At least with Metro apps this isn't an issue, that's certainly a step forward. As for lack luster nVidia and AMD driver support. I've had zero issues with my dual screen 580 GTX under Windows 8 for months now. I just installed Windows 8 on a separate drive on the sig rig, kept Windows 7 on a separate drive using the 313.96 drivers to try out Crysis 3 under Windows 8. I've had no problems with 2D Surround in the handful of game I've tested thus far, some issues with 3D Surround in a half the games, but no issues with 3D Blu Ray playback which has very temperamental in Windows 7 depending on the driver.

When learning to use it means losing money, you decide against using it in the first place. When you've got to worry about issues like the ones I noted in this thread, you quickly reach the conclusion that it's not worth the trouble. It either works and works well or it won't be used. This is enterprise we're talking about, not the average schmuck sitting on his toilet playing with his new gadget.

Where is all of the money that was lost when people moved to Office 2007? Employees adapting to new software and business processes is just how it goes. I'm not saying that Windows 8 is right for everyone and all businesses but I think that it is silly to think that Windows 8 is some super costly unlearnable thing when people each and everyday have to learn new things to remain productive and employed.

 

[pelo]

Single program != entire OS. Difficulties associated with working around an entire OS > simple ribbon change.

DPI scaling is now a much bigger issue when you're pushing products with varying degrees of default DPI scaling. How in the hell are you not grasping this concept? Pixel density has gone up and their own products can't even do it properly!

These scaling factors also have repercussions for those desktop apps that try to be touch-aware. Chief among them is Office 2013. Although I'm not impressed with the concessions Office 2013 makes to touch input, it does at least try. Enable touch mode and the ribbon gets much larger and easier to hit. Unfortunately, the enlarging of the ribbon doesn't appear to properly take into account the effect of DPI. As a result, Office 2013's touch mode is physically smaller than Office RT's. The Office 2013 ribbon in touch mode includes more buttons and text labels, but its touch targets are smaller as a result.

If I were to guess, I would say that Office 2013's touch mode is basing its calculations on the raw screen resolution, and not taking into account the higher DPI. That seems like a remarkable oversight, but I'm not sure what else would explain it.

They can't even get it right in MS Office or IE, so how in the world do you think that with their new products that have *more trouble with DPI scaling* it's somehow equal with Win7?

It isn't. It's worse. If you want to plug in an external display into the Surface Pro (like a laptop that it's supposed to replace), it renders the Surface Pro screen utterly useless as it has to be defaulted to 1080p native resolution (or backwards DPI scaling). Toss in that amazingly awesome Metro screen that takes up an entire display on its own, or worse yet multiple displays depending on your settings. People have multiple displays because they need more workspace, not so it can be taken up by a poorly thought-out start screen.

 

[DW-UK]

After having looked around, a bit, this Surface Pro is starting to look a bit better than some of the alternatives out there.

 

[heatlesssun]

Single program != entire OS. Difficulties associated with working around an entire OS > simple ribbon change.

Office isn't a single program and there are plenty of people that sped a WHOLE lot more time in Office programs than in the Windows UI. No matter which side of the debate one is one about the Windows 8 UI, some people will have little problem with it and some will have lots of problems with it. I just don't think that it will remain a problem forever as more people figure it out, better training is available and the UI is improved. Maybe figuring out Windows 8 will forever and always be a problem but it's not like everyone that's used a version of Windows had it all figured out. Most just typically learn what they need to know.

DPI scaling is now a much bigger issue when you're pushing products with varying degrees of default DPI scaling. How in the hell are you not grasping this concept? Pixel density has gone up and their own products can't even do it properly!

I understand the concept perfectly because the exact same issue with the desktop on Windows tablets has always existed, it's not a new problem but sure it gets worse with smaller and higher density displays. Windows 7 tablets shipped with the default desktop DPI above 100% like the Asus EP121 though that was a much lower pixel density than the Surface Pro.

I understand this problem and have been talking about it for a long time as it is a problem with using the Windows desktop on a small high DPI display. That said I've not played with it a display this dense on a Windows 8 tablet (and neither have you) and as I've pointed out adjusting the DPI isn't the only option, you can increase font sizes on window elements and I've done this in lieu of changing the default DPI because it seems to have fewer side effects. It is a problem and one that needs to be addressed but the problem very much depends on the apps and things one is trying to do on the desktop with touch only.

They can't even get it right in MS Office or IE, so how in the world do you think that with their new products that have *more trouble with DPI scaling* it's somehow equal with Win7?

There is a Metro version of IE that doesn't have this problem. And actually with Office and IE you can probably fix this issue better with changing the default font sizes than with scaling and enabling the touch mode in Office 2013.

It isn't. It's worse. If you want to plug in an external display into the Surface Pro (like a laptop that it's supposed to replace), it renders the Surface Pro screen utterly useless as it has to be defaulted to 1080p native resolution (or backwards DPI scaling). Toss in that amazingly awesome Metro screen that takes up an entire display on its own, or worse yet multiple displays depending on your settings. People have multiple displays because they need more workspace, not so it can be taken up by a poorly thought-out start screen.

Never actually having used a Windows 8 tablet, you say a lot of things that don't necessarily bear a lot of resemblance to real world operation. If you have a Surface Pro hooked into an external monitor why would the Surface Pro display be useless? You're saying you can't use a mouse? Or that you couldn't run Metro apps on it that scale properly? Or that increasing default sizes won't help with dealing with the pixel density?

 

[DeathPrincess]

Isn't that what Mr. Heatlesssun is for?

 

[DW-UK]

As with Apple’s iPhone & iPad, I predict that Microsoft will come up with a new Surface every couple of years. It will make use of the common technology of the time, as well as a necessary version of Windows.

Same thing with Xbox, and Sony PlayStation. New generation every couple of years. It is a better design and business model to follow. Ask Apple.

 

[wtburnette]

They mentioned a few times in the AMA that they've allowed the possibility of a battery keyboard dock, followed by lots of annoying 's, but no words on what that'll actually entail or the battery life gain.

They really don't need to get the price down though. This is an enterprise machine, not a general consumer device. What they need is a better keyboard and battery life.

With every business I know trying to extend the life of their machines and cut costs wherever they can, I'll stick with the fact that they need to reduce the cost. If they want to sell a decent amount of these to consumers, it's even more essential.

No it isn't. It's targeted at average consumers. I agree that the enterprise segment is the one that bears to benefit from this type of device, but that's not what Microsoft is after with these things. The response in the AMA shows that much; the surface pro is meant to be a tablet and laptop all in a single package. Independent scaling doesn't work, an absolute must if you're going to dock it, but then again there is no docking option either. These things are requirements in the business/enterprise segment.

No good docking option is killing a lot of these super portable types of machines. When I worked desktop support (up to a few months ago) we would not even consider a laptop unless it docked into a regular docking station, not one of those horrid USB port replicator pieces of crap. Few in the business world want to have to plug in a minimum of three things each and every time they get to their desk. They want to just click into a dock and be done with it. This has killed almost every chance of most ultrabooks being adopted by businesses.

I know there is a segment of users who can replace their laptop with the Surface Pro, but I don't think it's a very large segment. You just give up too much.

 

[odditory]

And no enterprise was going to roll out Office 2007 because the ribbon dumbed down the UI and would require massive retraining and yet they did, plenty did. Tablets and touch are being focused more than ever at business and the enterprise. Adding these features while retaining the Windows 7 desktop could be considered more of a play for the enterprise than for the consumer space.

The Office 2007 ribbon argument is beyond stale, you're bailing the ocean my friend. Hardly the same, a different way of dealing with Office - and buttons/functions that were changed instead of completely hidden from view - versus a tablet environment that takes over the entire screen with no inherent productivity purposes for the sole purpose of trying to lend some cred to the dead in the water mobile offerings. Microsoft calls it the OOBE and its broken out of the box.

The bottom line for enterprise use: There's nothing in Windows 8 and Metro where if a CIO asked me "what will we gain by switching our installed base to Window 8", I would have nothing in the pro's column outside maybe SMB3.0/SMB Multichannel for workstation/powerusers that need some extra bandwidth, and a list of cons a mile long.

 

[mknlb50]

Microsoft Surface Pro isn't very good and this type of product has been around for awhile now. So, no. This isn't the next step. Sorry Microsoft. You guys really need to listen to what the consumers want and need instead of rehashing the same old concept and hoping that people will jump on it.