

Surface: Between a Rock and a Hardware Place - blutonium
http://daringfireball.net/2012/06/surface_between_rock_and_hardware_place

======
latch

       Microsoft this week showed itself willing to do what was once unthinkable: design and sell its own computer hardware
    

What about the Zune, Kin and Xbox. Two of them might have been disasters, but
clearly MS has a history of designing hardware.

They are giving too much choice (1). To me, the real issue is availability.
They shouldn't have had the press conference until the device was available on
the same day. They _always_ do this, and it rarely works out. They would have
sold more devices in the first week, had it been available immediately, then
they now will in a quarter.

(1)
[http://www.ted.com/talks/barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_ch...](http://www.ted.com/talks/barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_choice.html)

~~~
gnaffle
The Zune, Kin an Xbox weren't devices sold in Microsofts primary market.

And you can see how they have done what they can in order to not screw over
the hardware manufacturers, by promising to only sell the device through their
retails stores.

..and now HP and Mark Hurds initial strategy with WebOS doesn't seem so stupid
after all.

------
ekianjo
These stories about the "post-PC future" always make me laugh, I still dont
see people working on iPads in real offices where you do REAL work.

The future of computing is going to be fragmented. Not unified by a single
tablet model.

Every time something new comes up we always get the same BS: "netbooks are
going to replace computers". "iPhones are going to replace computers", "ipads
are going to replace computers".

Give me a break.

~~~
nielsandersen
I agree with your idea that the future will be a fragmented one. And obviously
there are still a lot of desktops and laptops at offices.

In my work for a digital agency we have a lot of projects going with tablets
(well let's be honest it's all iPads) to work as replacement for laptops for
certain processes and situations. There are so many real-life processes
happening today where toting a laptop around is really not ideal and tablets
have some awesome characteristics which make them a great second or third
device for some job descriptions, but also a first device for others.

For pump installers for instance a laptop is a pain in the ass. They all have
one, but they never bring it out of the car with them because it's heavy, has
poor battery life and is really impractical when you're working in a dusty,
dark environment. A tablet on the other hand serves them well. They can bring
it with them. Hang it on a pipe somewhere and watch that installation video or
look up that manual that they are needing. Battery life is so that they don't
have to charge it all week. Everybody wins.

Don't mean to get carried away, but the world is really full of people doing
"real work" where laptops and desktops are just not the best solution.

~~~
ekianjo
> Don't mean to get carried away, but the world is really full of people doing
> "real work" where laptops and desktops are just not the best solution.

I'm sure there is. But by far, most businesses still need laptops and proper
desktops to work. Sometime you need a big screen. Most of the time you want to
have a keyboard, a good one, to type fast. You want to have the precision of
the mouse of do things on screen. ANd you need power. A portable device, no
matter how good it is, is constrained by ventilation, temperature limits,
processor speed, space, and so on. For the price of an iPad you get a much
more powerful desktop computer.

Tablets have advantages as consumer devices, as presentation devices, as
"reader / browsing" devices. They are convenient. I do not deny that. But they
simply won't replace everything else.

And the reason why the iPad sells so well is because it's a disposable device
at heart. Whenever a new iPad comes out, most of the previous iPad owners drop
their older version to get the new one. (same for the iPhone, by the way).
Usually computer users keep their PCs active for way longer than that.

~~~
keithpeter
"But by far, most businesses still need laptops and proper desktops to work.
Sometime you need a big screen. Most of the time you want to have a keyboard,
a good one, to type fast. You want to have the precision of the mouse of do
things on screen."

Absolutely, _I_ need those things... for about 15% of my working time.

I suspect lot of people in roles where access to information is needed with
minimal modification or addition to the data could work with other devices.

~~~
ekianjo
> Absolutely, I need those things... for about 15% of my working time.

By curiosity, what do you do the rest of your working time?

~~~
keithpeter
I talk to people. (I'm a teacher)

~~~
ekianjo
Allright. In that case I cannot argue.

------
judofyr
> Skepticism about these things doesn’t require knee-jerk Apple fandom. It
> simply requires an open set of eyeballs.

This is why I don't read Daring Fireball regularly. It's a blog solely focused
on being skeptical about everything. The whole premise seems to be to find
flaws in products/services and tell the world about them. I don't mind
skepticism, but there's a difference between "it has these cool concepts, but
it ain't perfect and probably will fail" and "it's going to fail because of A,
B, C, D, … Z"

Gruber might be accurate, but in my daily reading I prefer people with a bit
more positive thoughts.

~~~
lostlogin
Different reasons to avoid him for me. The 5by5 shenanigans put me right off
him.

~~~
cubicle67
for anyone like me who had no idea what 5by5 was, it seems like it's a talk
show that Gruber was part of, then he left to do another, or something like
that. meh

was unable to find reference to said shenanigans though, which was
disappointing

~~~
sadlyNess
Here[[http://www.candlerblog.com/2012/05/18/where-did-the-talk-
sho...](http://www.candlerblog.com/2012/05/18/where-did-the-talk-show-go/)]
and [<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3993649>] .

------
bambax
> _So Microsoft faces a dilemma. Their business model of expensive software on
> cheap hardware is not sustainable. The future is nearly free software
> integrated into moderately priced hardware._

Apple, for all that's said about their software being excellent (and maybe it
is) is a hardware maker. As such, they try to commoditize software: make
complements to their own products as cheap as possible, so that the overall
cost of buying Apple is as low as possible (while keeping their part of the
profits as high as possible).

They have been immensely successful at this, obviously; but that doesn't mean
"the future is nearly free software"! It means, Apple is trying to commoditize
software and is doing a fantastic job at it. (Much better than what Sun tried
to do for example).

But the answer to this, is that software makers should try to commoditize
hardware. Of course, this is much harder, since the marginal price of a piece
of hardware is non-zero. It may even be impossible, but that's still what
Microsoft is trying to do -- it's not trying to jump into hardware making
because "that's where profits are", it's trying to attack the hardware value
proposition.

> _the radical shift in Microsoft’s strategy is about the fight over the
> profits that remain after Apple’s_

No, it really isn't. (Profits are the whole point, yes -- but the question is,
what kind of profits are we talking about). Microsoft wants to bring the whole
value of hardware down -- it doesn't want to take hardware profits for itself,
it wants to make hardware profits disappear _for everybody_.

(It should give the Surface away for free.)

~~~
AllenKids
The problem with your scenario is quite obvious.

Consumers do not see profit, they see price tag. Hardware comes with a price
tag, so the options are sell at cost or find a way to subside the hardware.

With Apple pushing for ever so cheap App Store software so much so it is
willing to drastically cut its own premium software's price. The potential for
a software subsided hardware business is diminishing fast. While Apple may
forever lost the ability to sell hardware at 100% markup, Microsoft in the
mean time is losing the ability to sell software for $100 and more . It is
already reality in consumer space, and the price structure is collapsing too
in the business world.

Microsoft has the money to give millions of Surfaces away for free, then what?
It kills all its OEM in the process and can not make the money back on 30%
software sales cut. And next year Apple brings out fucking iPad 4... Genius
plan then?

------
daliusd
Yes, it really looks like Microsoft wants to be Apple. Based on what Elop does
in Nokia I believe that Microsoft wants to buy Nokia as well. There are lot of
steps that makes Nokia unattractive company for other companies (e.g. "patent
trolling" accuses from Google to Nokia), other steps (MeeGo and Meltemi
termination, Symbian support moved to Accenture) that leaves Nokia only with
WP and outdated feature phones (what makes Nokia unattractive target again
unless you are Microsoft).

Other companies might consider buying Nokia only to prevent Microsoft doing
that what would be quite fun to watch actually.

------
rlu
I'm not really sure what this post is trying to say. Is it trying to criticize
Microsoft? It doesn't really feel like it. Is it just a "this is a very
important time for MS" post?

I think that's obvious. It IS a very important time for MS and Windows 8 needs
to do well. I think the post misses an important angle to Surface though: in
large part it is meant to make OEMs step their game up. It shows what
Microsoft envisions can be done with a good formfactor and Win8. OEMs need to
step up to the plate and make similar hardware. Not necesarily identical but
very much in the same spirit.

A well execution should dent iPad sales because on paper, Windows 8 with a
good form factor destroys the iPad every time.

Side note: I thought the keynote was actually fine. I completely agree that
something seemed rather off about Sinofsky. He did seem nervous and he usually
delivers quite solid keynotes. It was strange. I think everyone else performed
fine. I actually liked the way the keynote was set up. At first it's just a
tablet which is cool in of itself. Then it has a kickstand. And then it has a
keyboard. Surprise after surprise.

Re: "Design is about making decisions, and Microsoft could not decide. ARM or
Intel? Who should be on stage? Soft or hard keys on the keyboard cover? They
went with 'all of the above'."

Windows has always been about having a lot of options. I think it's wonderful
that there will be both an ARM version and an x86 version.

~~~
wvenable
There is an implicit assumption that OEM's are just lining up waiting for
Microsoft to release an OS for them. But with Android being both _free_ and
successful, OEMs have little reason to risk building top of the line devices
for Microsoft. I suspect very few people could name off any of the dozen
Windows Phone's other than the Lumina.

------
martinkallstrom
As a regular Apple user (iphone/ipad/macbook air are my main tools), in my
eyes Gruber is jumping the shark here. He comments on the structure of the
event, his own feelings watching it. He comments on what information that has
not yet been released. He clearly wants to move focus away from the hardware
itself. Perhaps because it is just a little too awesome to come from MS?

~~~
2muchcoffeeman
It appears to be really good, but MS doesn't really have anything yet. You
can't buy it, you can't pre-order and it appears that no journalist had any
hands-on time with the keyboard. All we have are promises and anyone can do
that.

~~~
martinkallstrom
I disagree wholeheartedly. Vision is also hard. Making and communicating a
promise that gets people excited, is really really tough. There are thousands
of product videos published every month trying to make promises people care
about. Living up to the promises is also a great challenge. But to me, vision
is not as easy as you describe it.

------
NeutronBoy
I think they did rush the demo, but they needed to.

They'd revealed Windows 8 and had mixed reactions about teh touch interface,
and both users and developers were skeptical about it. They needed to show off
this hardware for everything to make sense. When I saw the presentation, I had
this 'Ohhhhh....' moment where it all made sense - the interface, the
hardware, their strategy.

They pushed this launch forward to show they actually had a plan.

------
Tloewald
I think Surface could be a pretty compelling product if all the stars align,
but the fact that Microsoft wouldn't even let members of the press touch a
working keyboard and the overall fragmented quality of the launch does not
bode well.

~~~
noveltyaccount
I question the timing; it seemed rushed to get in front of Google I/O. The
press had to stand behind a roped-off table of Surfaces to take photos.
Clearly the hardware and software is not ready--nor does it have to be for an
October-ish launch. But why did they _have to demo it now_ when the press
couldn't have their way with it?

All that said: take my money. I want one of each.

~~~
rlu
I imagine part of it might be to just get more excitement about Windows 8 both
in the consumer and developer community. Perhaps they thought that it might
make more developers begin to make apps for Win8? Anyone who was thinking
about it should probably be convinced by now that it's a good platform...

------
quadhome
_Android (which no one wants on anything other than phones)_

Oh? Now Gruber says people want Android on phones?

Sorry, we're doing Apple vs. Microsoft here. I'll try to not get distracted.

------
Zolomon
"Surface is a bold move, and classic Microsoft. If the OEMs don’t like it —
and they do not — what are they going to do? Turn to Linux (which no one
wants) ... ?"

I want Linux over Mac OSX and Windows 7. Imagine how fast Linux would grow if
they got the OEMs's support.

~~~
middus
Maybe he meant "which no one [of the OEMs] wants"?

I would love to buy laptops et al. with good Linux support. In fact, I once
bought a glorious Dell XPS M1330 ... with a horribly outdated Ubuntu install.

------
fauigerzigerk
I clicked on this story expecting the usual blatantly biased and totally
pointless drivel from this guy. I wasn't disappointed. He keeps raising the
bar for embarrassing tech commentary and that's why I will keep reading him
knowing full well I shouldn't waste my time on that kind of trolling.

Now I'm even wasting your time by commenting on it. Please vote me down to -10
or I'll have to fagellate myself for an entire week!

~~~
technoslut
I didn't downvote you but it would be helpful you cited flaws in the article.

~~~
fauigerzigerk
The flaws in this post are the same as in every single one of his posts. He
makes it sound like he was doing some kind of analysis when it's really just a
tortured justification for his preconceptions. It's disingenuous.

What he usually does when he writes about Apple technologies is to look for
the good even in the obviously bad. In this piece about a Microsoft
technology, he goes out of his way to ignore everything that might potentially
be good or interesting.

------
jroseattle
I'm not sure I follow Gruber's post here, which ironically points out how
Microsoft's presentation this week for a tablet was incoherent and all over
the map (kind of like this post.) I guess he's trying to assess Microsoft's
position in the market by comparing their product announcement presentation
skills to Apple's.

Really, when will the likes of Gruber learn that consumers will decide if they
like those products, and they'll do so with their wallets. Surely he doesn't
believe that Apple's success with i{whatever} is due to slick, coherent
stories told onstage at some event they couldn't get into.

The truth is that the masses who buy these devices could care less about
product announcements, Apple included. Apple customers will line up for the
next item, no matter what it is. Microsoft customers -- well, not quite sure
what floats their boat, but they'll do their thing.

These announcements are for lighting up the third-parties who like to consider
themselves quasi-insiders. Like Gruber, for instance.

~~~
NaOH
_I'm not sure I follow Gruber's post here..._

I thought Gruber's point was very clear: Consumer expectations have shifted
such that companies which survive (read: profit) are those which make money
from reasonably priced hardware while the software is sold at low, low prices.
The phenomenal, decades-long profitability of Microsoft has been based on
consumers behaving in an opposite way: paying bare-minimum prices for hardware
but a premium for software.

The computer hardware industry is lined up to favor the hardware makers. They
can also make the software (like Apple does with iOS) or they can acquire it
at low cost (like Samsung using Android), but the profits come from hardware.
The Surface, no matter how good it may or may not be since no can reasonably
evaluate it yet, is a testament to Microsoft recognizing this shift.

Really, the details of the market shift are irrelevant. The point is that the
market is moving away from what has made Microsoft profitable, and the company
has publicly (if in some ways indirectly) shown it understands this. The
Surface (and Windows 8), despite how important it may be to the future of
Microsoft, is most notable for the change it represents Microsoft making in
its approach to profitability.

~~~
jroseattle
I agree with your points, but I didn't think Gruber made that argument. He
referenced others who commented on the subject, but he could have made his
point without spending so much time comparing product announcement logistics
of the two companies.

I think the shift to their own hardware, for this Surface product, is more
about trying to achieve a user experience on par with Apple. It's obvious they
haven't learned from Apple in that the user's experience includes first
hearing/seeing the product on stage, immediate availability, etc. so the
rollout isn't polished (far from it.)

I'm just not sure Microsoft is all-in on recognizing the full profitability
shift where their software is essentially a loss leader. If Microsoft releases
their own high-end desktop PC and phone with Windows 8 sometime in the next 12
months, then I'll believe they've made that mental leap.

------
ZeroGravitas
Isn't there a contradiction between Apple taking all the profits in PCs and
Microsoft's taking of 78 dollars from every PC sold (and maybe half that for
every mac with office)? I think he's been confused by the Apple world's
tendency to compare Apple to hardware manufacturers and conveniently forget to
include Microsoft and Google's profits in their pretty charts.

Also odd to see him still claiming that no-one but Apple could have made
Samsung's A4 chip.

------
antidoh
"Microsoft this week showed itself willing to do what was once unthinkable:
design and sell its own PC hardware. ... But make no mistake: for better or
for worse, Surface marks a watershed moment in PC industry history."

That remains to be seen, and depends on Microsoft being willing and able to
stick with the Surface. They could easily screw this up, like the Kin, or lose
interest and energy like the Zune.

------
Tichy
Are people really using their tablets much? Sure, Apple/Jobs made us want one,
but I am still looking for a killer app. My Android tablet mostly gets used
for Skype, which is great, but hardly worth the price.

