Microsoft Surface Tablet

[CyberNerd]

Microsoft unveils new tablet for uncool people

NSFW

[Danp]

As many have mentioned, the key point here is the price, if they released the Pro around the £450 mark today, they have a chance of it taking off, if they price it near the top £500's they have missed the boat.

[enjay]

As many have mentioned, the key point here is the price, if they released the Pro around the £450 mark today, they have a chance of it taking off, if they price it near the top £500's they have missed the boat.

 

Not sure how achievable that is though. iPads, Galaxy Tabs and Iconia are all £400-500, and don't have a keyboard or case; the Transformer is around £500.

[jamesfed]

Not sure how achievable that is though. iPads, Galaxy Tabs and Iconia are all £400-500, and don't have a keyboard or case; the Transformer is around £500.

 

One thing others have pointed out is Microsoft won't need to pay its self any licencing fees - yes Android is 'free' however there are still some fees to be paied.

[LosOjos]

Not sure how achievable that is though. iPads, Galaxy Tabs and Iconia are all £400-500, and don't have a keyboard or case; the Transformer is around £500.

 

They most likely only cost a fraction of that to produce but are sold in that bracket because they can be - supply and demand.

 

One thing others have pointed out is Microsoft won't need to pay its self any licencing fees - yes Android is 'free' however there are still some fees to be paied.

 

Such as? It's open source, so I don't know which fees you could possibly mean...

[CyberNerd]

One thing others have pointed out is Microsoft won't need to pay its self any licencing fees - yes Android is 'free' however there are still some fees to be paied.

 

MS just illegally use others work without paying royalties, then wonder why their xboxes are banned from sale.

The android manufacturers are only paying MS under threat of being sued. The only people who stood up to them were Barnes and Noble, who then got a mysterious $600M deal to keep them quiet.

[localzuk]

Such as? It's open source, so I don't know which fees you could possibly mean...

 

Microsoft is paid around $35 (I believe) per Android device sold by Google, due to patent licensing.

[sonofsanta]

As many have mentioned, the key point here is the price, if they released the Pro around the £450 mark today, they have a chance of it taking off, if they price it near the top £500's they have missed the boat.

 

They're saying it's equivalent to an ultrabook; expect it to be around £800.

 

To be fair, on paper at least, it is in a class above the iPad and aiming at a different market.

[CyberNerd]

Microsoft is paid around $35 (I believe) per Android device sold by Google, due to patent licensing.

 

They don't actually license any patents to them. they just promise not to sue them.

[localzuk]

They don't actually license any patents to them. they just promise not to sue them.

 

Proof? That's not generally how it works...

[CyberNerd]

Proof? That's not generally how it works...

 

It's not generally how it works because it's bullying tactics.

 

The details are all on groklaw; see MS - Barnes and Noble

 

Groklaw - Archives

[jamesfed]

It's not generally how it works because it's bullying tactics.

 

Bully tatics or the way the world of IP works

 

At least Microsoft doesn’t go around suing everyone like Apple has been.

[edutech4schools]

from the traditional desktop users who are not happy with the start menu removal to name just one of a few gripes.

 

Thought they are adding it back in the final release.

[sonofsanta]

Thought they are adding it back in the final release.

 

Very much the opposite - they're removing any code that would even let you hack one back in

[ZeroHour]

The Pro edition will probably be in the £800-£900 range with RT being £400-£600 I would think to remain competitive.

One thing to consider is unlike the iOS based devices there will be others out there selling for more/less of each edition, the surface does look brilliant but it will be interesting to see what the cheapest RT and Pro tablets cost as I think the surface could be the best of the bunch for design/features but probably not the cheapest.

 

MS just illegally use others work without paying royalties, then wonder why their xboxes are banned from sale.

 

Ironically its google/motorola doing the FRAND abuse in that case btw and we all know what apple can be like. Cyber you must have some job ensuring you dont buy google/apple/rim/ms stuff as all have had things in the past which are better left in the past. Enjoy sitting in the dark with no tech trying to avoid all these companies that are evil as none are clean.

[CyberNerd]

Cyber you must have some job ensuring you dont buy google/apple/rim/ms stuff as all have had things in the past which are better left in the past. Enjoy sitting in the dark with no tech trying to avoid all these companies that are evil as none are clean.

 

Of those companies I do have to pay Microsoft and I do get a very dirty feeling when I sign of an order requisition.

[ZeroHour]

Of those companies I do have to pay Microsoft and I do get a very dirty feeling when I sign of an order requisition.

 

ROFL, I have images of a shaking hand while trying to sign....

[CyberNerd]

ROFL, I have images of a shaking hand while trying to sign....

 

Its pretty much like that. I usually go home, bathe then drink beer to forget about it.

At least when MS release some of their more ubiquitous technologies under Non-Discriminatory licensing I'll be able to do it all with opensource .

[GREED]

Is this animosity based on ethics or elements of the technologies? Interested that all

[CyberNerd]

Is this animosity based on ethics or elements of the technologies? Interested that all

 

Since you asked...

I suppose ethics. I quite like new technologies, and most of the tech I'm interested in has its roots in opensource way before MS get their hands on it.

 

In my surreal head it goes like this: MS just annoy me, they have never been a particularly ethical company. Despite giving discount to schools they still charge WAY too much considering we are helping them maintain their monosystem for future generations. If I can run something on linux for free I will. I don't like that any company restrict the use of its products, esp making tablets throwaway devices by preventing you from installing X on them. Capita and RM are probably the most evil companies because they specifically target the educational sector to fleece vast amounts of cash away from schools. Whats worse is their MS partnerships that artificially increase schools costs (RM less so than Capita). Exam boards are pretty high up on the list for much the same reason. Apple are pretty evil, but they are targeting the consumer market rather than fleecing the educational/government sector per se. Companies like smoothwall that target educational but give sizable proportions of their research to projects like dansguardian get a thumbs up, plus I pay for support. It's extra with MS.

Google don't charge us for support or for their products, and they allegedly don't use our data (infact they actively fight for users rights in the courts) they give a lot back to OSS projects and that makes them good in my eyes. Redhat only charge us for support and give everything back to the 'community'.

 

The thing is - schools don't actually need to pay for software to get the kids qualifications enough of an understanding of technology. I know this has been debated to death its just my weird idea of ethics. I'm striving for an ideal world where all software is free but people make money from it too.

 

So generally my 'evil' list works like this:

 

Capita>RM>Pearson>Microsoft>Apple>other hardware vendors> Google > Redhat

[alttab]

Certainly impressive. The USB port is a nice addition, and I do like the slim case rather than having a sleeve or bulky leather add-on case like iPads and Kindles have (the official Samsung bookcase cover for Galaxy Tab is the same, and by far the nicest case I've had for it). That keyboard is extremely slick, too.

 

The big plus point here is the full integration and central manageability. Tablets have a definite place in education (both as staff devices and pupil devices), and this nicely settles the "how the !"£$%^& do we make this talk to our network?" issue. That is a feature of it having an Ivy Bridge not ARM processor, right?

 

I would still be inclined to wait until nearer Win8 release date and see what other manufacturers do, however the bar has definitely been set.

 

manageability, but at a cost - at the higher end of the price range, with inferior battery runtime and standby compared to RT ARM devices. That's what you'd get if they're talking ultrabook prices for the ivy bridge range.

 

As you say several other manufacturers appear to be readying stuff for clover trail (atom) that will run full windows8, so that would in theory give you windows8 manageability at a lower price range. The ivy bridge surface has the fact that it's got slick packaging but it's price for schools in bulk purchases of what is still a 10.1" tablet at the end of the day. Even if it is running win8 rather than RT. Whereas hitting the ipad2 ex. vAT price is more likely to succeed for Microsoft and OEMs. Thing is folk now have expectations from the ipad2 as far as user experience, cloud based services baked into the OS, battery life....it's whether a clover trail device can come close to that or whether it's sort of barking up the wrong tree by trying to mix old with new.

 

Surface is a good teaser as flagship products go.

Edited June 19, 2012 by alttab

[GREED]

Since you asked...

I suppose ethics. I quite like new technologies, and most of the tech I'm interested in has its roots in opensource way before MS get their hands on it.

 

In my surreal head it goes like this: MS just annoy me, they have never been a particularly ethical company. Despite giving discount to schools they still charge WAY too much considering we are helping them maintain their monosystem for future generations. If I can run something on linux for free I will. I don't like that any company restrict the use of its products, esp making tablets throwaway devices by preventing you from installing X on them. Capita and RM are probably the most evil companies because they specifically target the educational sector to fleece vast amounts of cash away from schools. Whats worse is their MS partnerships that artificially increase schools costs (RM less so than Capita). Exam boards are pretty high up on the list for much the same reason. Apple are pretty evil, but they are targeting the consumer market rather than fleecing the educational/government sector per se. Companies like smoothwall that target educational but give sizable proportions of their research to projects like dansguardian get a thumbs up, plus I pay for support. It's extra with MS.

Google don't charge us for support or for their products, and they allegedly don't use our data (infact they actively fight for users rights in the courts) they give a lot back to OSS projects and that makes them good in my eyes. Redhat only charge us for support and give everything back to the 'community'.

 

The thing is - schools don't actually need to pay for software to get the kids qualifications enough of an understanding of technology. I know this has been debated to death its just my weird idea of ethics. I'm striving for an ideal world where all software is free but people make money from it too.

 

So generally my 'evil' list works like this:

 

Capita>RM>Pearson>Microsoft>Apple>other hardware vendors> Google > Redhat

 

Nice.

 

So with companies that only provide software for education (eerrrr us?!), what is your take on how that should work, be priced, etc etc? I know some offer vast numbers of products elsewhe as an overal parent company, that is another matter.

 

I won't want to talk about the details of why other vendors decide to do what they do or did to schools to make money... I think that has been talked to death too.

[CyberNerd]

Nice.

 

So with companies that only provide software for education (eerrrr us?!), what is your take on how that should work, be priced, etc etc? I know some offer vast numbers of products elsewhe as an overal parent company, that is another matter.

 

IMO Apps should be simply be written either using open standards, on in such a way that they are accessible using open standards. It would cut the cost to schools dramatically.

I don't have a problem with them selling stuff, or making money. I just don't think we should be so heavily locked in to particular vendors. Following the revolution I will make this mandatory.

[GREED]

IMO Apps should be simply be written either using open standards, on in such a way that they are accessible using open standards. It would cut the cost to schools dramatically.

I don't have a problem with them selling stuff, or making money. I just don't think we should be so heavily locked in to particular vendors. Following the revolution I will make this mandatory.

 

I like the term open standards... I hear it a lot

[ZeroHour]

Following the revolution I will make this mandatory.

Apple would/should be first on that chopping block, look at the whole locked in iOS system.