Last edited by EMINENT; 05 Aug 2013 at 11:17.
Maybe it's not a problem for users in their target niche, but it's a problem for Microsoft and their mobile strategy. Unless they're so delusional that they think that an pricey ultrabook in tablet form-factor is ever going to be anything but a niche, that is. Then again, they released their first generation Surface RT at ipad price levels almost three years after the first ipad was launched, so maybe delusional is exactly what they are.
It's not supercar performance though, I think is the point. I bought a laptop with more or less precisely the same specs as a 64GB surface pro for £450 about 2 weeks ago, running Windows 8 Pro. The only difference is it had a bigger hard drive rather than a (I'm assuming the surface comes with one) a SSD. In what universe do 64GB SSDs cost £300? Am I paying the extra for the ability to remove the keyboard? For that matter, you can get a perfectly nice hybrid for less than that as well, if that's what you're after.
Admittedly the Surface has some tablety bits that the laptop doesn't, such as a gyrometer and Accelerometer but again they can't cost that much, as they are in pretty much every smart phone, even the really cheap ones!
Edit; in fact after double checking the specs, the laptop I bought actually has a much better processor. Which just adds to my point really.
120 GB SSD's even including a WALLET BUSTING 20% VAT in the UK -- around 85 GBP. No way 300 GBP !!!!! -- and you probably can't even GET 64 GB ones any more. (A manufacturer would get BULK wholesale deal on SSD's so cost to actually put into a Surface Pro is probably of the order of 25 - 30 USD's).
I'm sure the HUGE premium charged for fitting SSD's is just purely SALES SPIEL --the GIGANTIC extra cost to the consumer certainly isn't justified in the slightest.
I still also think that a surface PRO is rather too expensive - especially as it has an almost ZERO upgrade capability --for instance affordable 512 GB SSD's are coming out and there's even a "Semi-Affordable" 1 TB model too. A decent laptop can be had much more cheaply than a Surface Pro and a decently small one is almost just as portable.
There are too many tablets out there that do more things for the same or a lesser price. Microsoft is late to the dance and what they offer doesn't compete well.
I don't have a need to have a computer nearby everywhere I go. In fact, sometimes it's nice to be someplace without one. I have a netbook that works fine for my portable computing needs. If I were in the market for a tablet I would be shopping by capabilities, future needs, and capacity. Based on what little I know and have seen or experienced, I would not be surprised if neither Apple nor Microsoft came out the winner.
Wow, seems like a lot of complaints from those that don't own a Surface.
I own one, and I think it is fantastic. Comparing it to a laptop is a waste of time, unless you can rip the keyboard off your laptop and still use it. They are not the same. My Spousal Unit was very happy surfing with it on her lap, using the touch screen without the keyboard. She mentioned how light it is. This from the Woman that refuses to use laptops in the house, when she can use her Desktop.
I have a Surface Pro on my desk at work, my company paid the bill. Honestly, I don't hardly ever use the thing. Sometimes I take it with me to a meeting to write up notes. I bet I average less than 20 minutes a week using the device.
Overall, it's a good piece of kit, and for the specs and the size the price is reasonable. But I'd much rather just use my laptop with a full size keyboard, larger screen, etc. I'm not a fan of touch interfaces, so that selling point is really lost on me.