

Surface changes everything: Android will be 3rd ranked tablet OS inside a year - oliveremberton
http://blog.silktide.com/2012/06/why-android-is-the-3rd-ranked-tablet-os-inside-a-year/

======
grovulent
All this from a wank-tastic buzz video that doesn't even show the device in
operation?

What is it with the punditry these days? Surely there is a whole evo-biol book
out there devoted to explaining this particular nonsense facet of human
behaviour?

~~~
huggyface
Most importantly of all, no prices at all have been unveiled. There are no
reviews. There is no ecosystem (speaking specifically of the ARM device. The
Intel device is going to be a hot, power-gobbling, very expensive beast and is
effectively an ultrabook more than a tablet)

Yup, sure thing. Apple better start saving for that rainy day.

~~~
oliveremberton
OP here. I agree (and state in my article) that MS could completely screw this
up by pricing themselves out of the market. I don't expect they will though,
but mostly because they can afford to make it cheap - even sell at cost, if
they have to.

I'd argue that reviews and software are less relevant here than they were for
say Android in a similar position:

1\. People will buy it regardless of reviews (even if only on the desktop at
first). Metro is guaranteed to get share off the back of Windows.

2\. Developers will follow that share.

Essentially with enough time Microsoft are guaranteed to leverage their
Windows share to Metro, and combined with some competitive hardware makes them
a force to be reckoned with.

I'm pretty much the definition of an Apple fanboy (I own an iPad, 2 MacBook
Pros, an iMac, an iPhone AND APPL stock). And I still stopped to say - that
hardware looks impressive. If they can do that to me, well...

------
zerohm
The brilliance of the ipad isn't what it can do, it's what it doesn't do.
E.g., Apple took away file management from the user, much like an automatic
transmission takes away shifting gears from the driver. Consumers love it but
enterprise IT is resisting for various reasons, so MS still has the advantage
in the corporate world.

But I'm not convinced this 'all in one' strategy is the best way for
Microsoft. If it's just Win7 with a fancy tiled interface, then it's really
not that much different from their previous tablet efforts. It all hinges on
getting good 3rd party app support. It'll probably sell higher volume because
they are faster and more responsive than the last generation, but they'll be
lucky to see half the sales of ipads in 5 years.

------
spiralpolitik
Surface is Microsofts attempt to appear relevant verses Apple and Google. They
need to show that they are still a mover and a shaker in the industry, even
more so given the damp squib that Windows Phone 7 has been so far.

A smarter move would have been to keep Windows 8 and Windows Metro separate.
Have Windows 8 be the continuation of the desktop/laptop line, a cash cow they
can continue to milk until it falls over dead a ways down the road. Metro
would the new hotness that brings the developers back to the yard. A new
environment for them to build off without the weeds of the last 20 years
strangling them.Free of the constraints of Windows, Metro would stand an
excellent chance to succeed against Apple, Android et al.

While bundling Metro together with Windows might give it a foundation to build
off but its more likely going to be the stone that sinks it.

~~~
oliveremberton
I respectfully disagree - in fact, I'd argue keeping them separate is one big
reason why Windows Mobile failed in the past (the other reason is it sucked
donkey balls).

Windows will sell regardless. It's a bit like if Google does something to the
UI which people don't like - people complain, and some may leave - but the
vast majority will stomach it. They're just that entrenched. Even Vista sold
400 million copies.

So by foisting Metro on their existing audience they virtually guarantee
hundreds of millions of Metro users (albeit on the desktop, or hybrid
platforms, at first). That gets their new OS traction, attracting developers,
building a software library and brand equity.

If they don't do that, they'd be stuck selling Windows AND selling a competing
OS at the same time (that rarely works out well). And they'd be up against iOS
and Android purely on their own merits. With the market as busy as it is now,
that'd be equivalent to releasing the Blackberry Playbook.

Of course I could be wrong - this is all just my speculation (I'm the OP btw).

------
dav-id
My feeling is that this will be a hit because imagine finding there are some
great applications you use daily on your Laptop in the WinRT mode and now you
can take them with you on your Surface device. As a developer and consumer I
am very excited about this and from an enterprise view consider being able to
re-use a lot of your code base to make these applications for your workers -
excellent!

I haven't used windows 8 so I don't know if it feels like a disaster to use on
a desktop but I am hoping and assuming once I get used to not having a start
button I will be quite happy using it and will love jumping into RT for the
more funky fun stuff.

~~~
ejenkinsiii
Very true this is aimed at a generation of Xbox players (youth) who aren't
tied to the old methods of getting things done this is basically a
computer/tablet with enough power for the standard user and if word,excel...
etc runs on it, it's what my kids are getting for school very flexible for
them. Though three things can kill microsofts growth.

1.price point, people won't understand the pro model's pricing which will be
the same as a standard pc in the $1,000 range

2.dont try to be like apple actually do the opposite, prove your product is
different.(the viewing should have been live your the new guy on the block)

3.make a tough decision and only allow windows 8 on touch screen desktop p.c's
if it's not touch screen you have to use the alternate desktop interface.

On top of this I'm wondering how much the language their using will be an
advantage C++ if any, if they supply devs with great templates like apple.

------
dscrd
The pompous attitude of Microsoft and everything that surronds them is getting
more silly and childish every time they do it. Does anyone buy it at all
anymore?

------
jezclaremurugan
Its too early to comment on how the market will react to Surface. There has
been previous instances where MS has over-hyped and failed to deliver.

~~~
delinka
I'd say this has the markings of overhype, what with not actually
demonstrating the device. We got, what ... a single demo of a video playing or
something?

~~~
k-mcgrady
Watch the launch event.[0] They demoed the device and it was available to the
press afterwards.

[0]: [http://cdn-smooth.ms-
studiosmedia.com/news/mp4_mq/06182012_S...](http://cdn-smooth.ms-
studiosmedia.com/news/mp4_mq/06182012_Surface_750k.mp4)

~~~
ZeroGravitas
The press were limited to 90-second-long guided sessions with the device
though.

------
chrisrhoden
I would love to finally see some real competition with iOS in the tablet
space, but my feeling is that this isn't it. It's Windows Phone 7, bigger. And
that worked beautifully for Apple, but nobody has been buying Windows Phone.

~~~
oliveremberton
Windows Phone had to compete with entrenched rivals, and was very late to the
party.

Metro is bundled with an OS that is essentially assured a crap-tonne of sales
before it's launched. It'll also have more exposure (in retail space etc) than
every other laptop and desktop out there.

Not saying it's a slam dunk, but if I were Apple or Google I'd be concerned.

~~~
huggyface
_Windows Phone had to compete with entrenched rivals, and was very late to the
party._

Windows Phone wasn't Microsoft's first dance on the smartphone floor. In fact
they were one of the very first on smartphones with Windows CE, heralded as a
sure thing because it was "bundled with an OS" with some sort of desktop
synergy that assured world dominance.

We know how that turned out. Apple and RIM ate their lunch, and the synergy
with the desktop thing was an anchor instead of a lift.

~~~
oliveremberton
It's a fair point, but I don't believe the comparison holds this time round.

Firstly, Windows CE was demonstrably years behind tech-wise - even a causal
grandmother consumer could see the difference between an iPhone and a CE
device. That's not the case here: this looks (to casual eyes) like an iPad
equivalent.

Secondly that time round they went at it by making the phone alude to the
Windows brand. Here they're using the Windows sales (which are assured) to get
Metro in front of users.

Thirdly they're now copying a proven thing (the iPad). Last time they were
half-leading the charge for semi-smartphones, and never figured out the right
tech to evangelise people. They've always been better at copying than at
innovating afresh.

Forthly they're all in. They basically screwed the desktop OS over to put
tablets front and centre. All their considerable weight and spending power
will be behind this - in shops up and down the land.

Of course it's not over yet. But if they play this right, it could be very
interesting game indeed.

~~~
cageface
\- Microsoft was in the phone business long before the iPhone and their
allegiance to Windows was one of the big reasons they sucked.

\- Massive Windows 8 sales numbers are far from guaranteed.

\- They've diverged pretty radically from the iPad UI. I'm happy to see this,
but this also means they can't count on similarities to the iPad to drive
sales.

This may in fact turn out to be a hit but I'm not persuaded by your arguments.

~~~
pauljburke
I had one of the first O2 XDA phones (released 2002) and also one of the first
iphones. I'd say the biggest improvement was in the network speed and price of
the data packages over the (5?) years or so between those two purchases. I'm
not saying the iPhone doesn't roundly trounce it in general, just other things
matter more.

------
DodgyEggplant
Surface is the MS-Office tablet. It's the tablet for people who need something
with Word and Excel.

