backtop


Print 104 comment(s) - last by TakinYourPoint.. on Oct 17 at 4:27 PM

Microsoft targets iPad pricing

Microsoft has gone official with pricing on its Surface RT tablets. Most people have been hoping the Microsoft Surface RT tablets would come in at less than Apple’s hugely popular iPad. However, Microsoft’s pricing puts Surface in close competition with comparable third generation iPads and higher than the iPad 2.
 
The 32GB Windows Surface RT tablet without the Black Touch cover, which also doubles as a keyboard, is $499. That makes it $100 more expensive than the entry-level Apple iPad 2 at $399. The $499 entry price for the Surface RT tablet puts it on par with pricing for the 16GB “New iPad”.
 
If you want the Touch Cover with its integrated keyboard, that option is $100 when you order, or $119.99 as an add-on later. You can pre-order the 32GB version with the cover for $599.
 
 
The third version has 64 GB of storage and ships with the Touch Cover – it will cost you $699. Any of the three tablet versions can be pre-ordered today with delivery expected by October 26.
 
Analysts seem to think that Windows 8 tablet pricing is too expensive, however, what do you guys think?
 
In other Surface news, you can catch Microsoft’s first ad for the new tablet here:
 

Source: Microsoft



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

stupid stupid price
By Bubbacub on 10/16/2012 11:15:49 AM , Rating: 2
google sell the nexus 7 with a 7 inch 720p IPS panel and a tegra 3 chip for £199

MS think its reasonable to add $300 for an extra 3 inches of screen and a few gigs of storage space.

this needed to be priced at ~ $300, $350 with the keyboard.

if they needed to cut down on screen size to get in at a palatable price then that would be fine.

as it is this is set up to crash and burn.

the fire sale in 6 months should be good value!




RE: stupid stupid price
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/16/2012 11:32:02 AM , Rating: 2
Are these 7 in? No? And adding 300? Look at the price of the iPad..


RE: stupid stupid price
By Rukkian on 10/16/2012 11:39:57 AM , Rating: 2
It will sell, mainly due to it having windows, to business. As for consumers, I cannot see many getting this, as it has the same issues as apple (proprietary, locked down, expensive) and also has very few apps and not many developers at this point to port all of the software over.

If the price was $500 with the cover, I could actually see it, or if the cover was like $25, but at $100 additional, it seems ridiculous.


RE: stupid stupid price
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/16/12, Rating: -1
RE: stupid stupid price
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/16/12, Rating: 0
RE: stupid stupid price
By GPig on 10/16/2012 12:26:24 PM , Rating: 2
Microsoft has the biggest army of developers by far. They have also been throwing world-wide FREE dev camps for the last few months. The apps will come, and fast.

There's already 3500 ish in the store. Microsoft have a target of 5000 by launch and 100,000 within 3 months. Apps will not be a problem for long.


RE: stupid stupid price
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/16/2012 1:26:43 PM , Rating: 1
I thought Apple did, TakinYourPoints says so, it's got to be true because he said it!


RE: stupid stupid price
By GPig on 10/16/2012 5:26:58 PM , Rating: 2
Must be true then. There's no way in the world that all us full time software engineers that have been building business / military / simulation / health care / government / educational / games / productivity software for the last 30 years for Windows could possibly number anywhere near the number of devs who have been banging out those hugely complex mobile apps that take eons to build (like seriously, some take more than a couple of weeks! OMG!)

Also funny how the majority of jobs I see for web, server side or desktop are all heading toward C#... even iOS games :)


RE: stupid stupid price
By TakinYourPoints on 10/16/2012 5:53:27 PM , Rating: 3
Yup, and I will continue to buy applications for the Microsoft desktop . I run Windows 8 on another machine and I doubt I will buy any applications for Metro anytime soon, I'm just not interested. I doubt many other people here are either based on the incredibly negative reaction to Metro, even after we've have had months to get used to it.

I do know that this is a needed gateway into tablet apps, but even then Microsoft needs to make more compelling tablet hardware. A late 2012 tablet with much slower hardware, a much lower res screen, and no app library compared to an early 2012 iPad is a very hard sell.

Either way, no arguments from me on the desktop side, obviously Microsoft has the most developers there and excellent developer tools. Hell, they have the best developer tools on the mobile side as well, but the developer community on the mobile side will take a while to get going since there are no customers there yet. We'll see if Metro jumpstarts it.


RE: stupid stupid price
By TakinYourPoints on 10/16/2012 5:34:42 PM , Rating: 2
Mobile developers. Come on, this is easy!


RE: stupid stupid price
By Helbore on 10/16/2012 6:51:14 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, no. Visual Studio developers. MSDN subscriber developers.

Pretty much the entire Microsoft development community will have access to the tools to build metro apps. When you consider that Vista was deemed a failure with a mere ~200 million sales, its not hard to believe that most developers with immediate "free" access to the tools to build metro apps will do so on the assumption that even a "failed" Windows release will result in a massive market to tap.

This isn't like Windows Phone, where the entire platform needs selling to consumers. Windows 8 will be on lots of PCs that will be selling regardless of how quicly people jump on the new-hardware/post-PC devices.

They've got nearly 4000 apps on a platform that hasn't hit general availability yet. They've got confirmed apps from big names guaranteed to be ready for GA. It's already not a dead platform as far as the ecosystem goes.


RE: stupid stupid price
By TakinYourPoints on 10/16/2012 7:05:20 PM , Rating: 2
I never said that Metro was a dead platform. I've been saying what you did, which is that Windows 8 will be an opportunity for Windows Metro tablet apps to catch on. I've also been saying that the iPhone and iPad currently have the largest and most profitable mobile ecosystem right now. Obviously all of this can change, and part of it is contingent on how many VS developers continue to jump over from desktop to making mobile apps, which of course depends on how many customers start using Metro.

We'll see!


RE: stupid stupid price
By Trisped on 10/16/2012 8:44:19 PM , Rating: 2
You thought Apple did what?
What does TakinYourPoints say?

I do not get it, did you reply to the wrong post?


RE: stupid stupid price
By Trisped on 10/16/2012 8:45:32 PM , Rating: 2
NVM, I get it now.
TakinYourPoints (DT commenter) said that Apple has the most devs.


RE: stupid stupid price
By TakinYourPoints on 10/16/2012 9:46:56 PM , Rating: 2
And I said it only in regards to smartphone and tablet apps, not most devs period. Count on cheese to take things completely out of context.


RE: stupid stupid price
By Scrogneugneu on 10/16/2012 5:54:50 PM , Rating: 2
My bet is on them not coming.

How many potential sales are you looking at right now if you develop for Windows RT?

0.

How many potential sales are you looking at at the start of 2013 if you develop for Windows RT?

Unless the Surface RT magically outsells the iPad and/or the Nexus tablets this Christmas for no reason at all, not much either.

As it is, the Surface RT project is gonna crash and burn. The full Surface, running Windows 8, has great potential. But if they price the handicapped version as high as the iPad, what will the real Surface cost be?


RE: stupid stupid price
By freedom4556 on 10/16/2012 6:41:43 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
How many potential sales are you looking at right now if you develop for Windows RT?

0.
That's not quite true. Any app targeting Metro will work on RT and 8/Pro equally, regardless of whether or not the device is Intel/ARM or even a tablet or not.


RE: stupid stupid price
By tayb on 10/16/2012 5:55:28 PM , Rating: 2
I have a few dozen friends or acquaintances who are programmers; a few develop for iOS, a few develop for Android, and the rest develop using MS tools either web or desktop. Of those developers utilizing MS tools exactly zero of them have plans to develop a Metro app or work for a company with plans to develop a Metro app. In short, Microsoft may have the largest pool of developers (by a long shot) but the vast majority of those developers aren't developing for Metro. Metro has virtually no market right now. No market, no money.

There is a lot of potential here for MS but as it stands right now I would say there are more active iOS and Android developers than there are Metro developers.


RE: stupid stupid price
By NellyFromMA on 10/16/2012 4:51:01 PM , Rating: 2
Apple has had no problem dominating the market share, wil mostly amazon scooping up the rest at virtually no profit.

I think MS will be just fine following suit.


RE: stupid stupid price
By someguy123 on 10/16/2012 12:04:20 PM , Rating: 2
Nexus 7 makes absolutely no money on hardware. It also has performance problems once you fill that nand yet has no SD slot.

I still think surface is overpriced for what it offers in hardware, but comparing it to devices that are subsidized and designed to produce money elsewhere makes no sense. Not to mention if they actually did subsidize it I'd bet the farm that they'd get antitrust suits up the ass.


RE: stupid stupid price
By geddarkstorm on 10/16/2012 12:21:14 PM , Rating: 4
Only problem is, $600 for the RT tablet (which is ARM not x86)) with cover is absurd when you have to consider what this must mean for the price of the higher spec'd full Windows 8 Surface tablet. That beast is going to be way overpriced now. MS is really shooting itself in the foot -- it isn't even in this mature, saturated market yet. This is supposed to be its first steps into it, but it's very unlikely consumers going to buy this en mass at such a price versus the already well established and generally cheaper competition.


RE: stupid stupid price
By nedsand on 10/16/2012 1:30:37 PM , Rating: 2
Yep. This is exactly what I read. I'm waiting on the x86 and have no use for the RT. But I will not be spending anywhere close to $1k for it. If I have to I'll wait till the price drops.


RE: stupid stupid price
By NellyFromMA on 10/16/2012 1:45:05 PM , Rating: 2
Um, you know the higher speced versions of the iPad cost more too, right?

It's all very comparable. the iPad doesn't come with a sleek cover that doubles as a keyboard either, and anything comparable is in the same ball park.

Non-point.


RE: stupid stupid price
By nedsand on 10/16/2012 4:15:22 PM , Rating: 3
The point is that the I-Pad is dictating pricing points and we all know Apple has an extremely high profit margin on them. That's not how the tech market has normally worked in the past. Slim margins on high volume is what I like to see.

Gimmi more GeeBees for my buck


RE: stupid stupid price
By NellyFromMA on 10/16/2012 4:53:30 PM , Rating: 2
Businesses like to make money. The majority of Apple's money made hardware wise is by driving labor costs extremely low and dominating the purchases of various supplies used by using its large volume purchases to negotiate.

Microsoft isn't exactly in that position. I suspect they won't profit a ton from Surface sales. They certainly won't from other vendors devices as compared to traditional licensing costs.

It's just not Apples to Apples (pun intended)


RE: stupid stupid price
By TakinYourPoints on 10/16/2012 6:02:53 PM , Rating: 3
Apple's profit margins are partly driven by dominating the supply chain. They outlay billions for components years in advance. They also know they'll sell tens of millions of units so they can buy in larger volume, further driving down their component and production costs. This means that they can release higher specced tablets and smartphones with better components at prices that the competition cannot match.

Again, supply chain is a huge reason why this is happening. Apple is simply getting better components for less money. What is a good profit margin for Apple is a poor one for others using lower end parts, even if they're selling at the same price as the iPad or close. If other companies really try and undercut (like Amazon) then they stand to make no money on hardware, but they also have a different business plan since they have advertising on the lock screen, etc etc.


RE: stupid stupid price
By Moishe on 10/17/2012 2:04:29 PM , Rating: 1
The full version *SHOULD* cost more than the best ipad. More space, x86, Intel i5, etc... that's a beast in the form of a really nice tablet that is beautiful and light.

What Microsoft is doing is giving a value reason for consumers to purchase the RT version; MS Office + more gigs for same price as entry ipad... AND a Pro version that trumps all other tablets in terms of functionality and speed.


RE: stupid stupid price
By FITCamaro on 10/16/2012 12:59:34 PM , Rating: 1
The iPad also has no SD slot.

And I don't see how I'd ever use all the space on my Nexus 7. There isn't enough stuff that I want.


RE: stupid stupid price
By mike8675309 on 10/16/2012 1:15:34 PM , Rating: 2
agree... a big mistake. Microsoft and their partners need to recognize they are not going to be able to pretend any type of parity with the iPad. They have yet to prove themselves and without a compelling advantage (crippled windows[RT] won't do it) their prices need to be materially below the competition.


RE: stupid stupid price
By StevoLincolnite on 10/16/2012 6:21:54 PM , Rating: 3
Don't stress. It's the early adopter tax.

By pricing it high, Microsoft can test the waters, and if the reception isn't as great as they had hoped they then have wiggle room to drop the price.


RE: stupid stupid price
By NellyFromMA on 10/16/2012 1:44:00 PM , Rating: 2
Developing apps for Android sucks. It's a serious hardship largely because more often than not its even more fragmented and nebulous than web development (if you can imagine sucha thing).

Development for Apple sucks because Objective C is frankly a terrible language.

Having just started developing RT apps, it is a breeze and a pleasure as most of MS managed languages are.

MS GETS developers. Developers make apps. They drive businesses, and ultimately they decide in large part a platforms success or failure.

Add all the synergy MS is creating across a large swath of its products and devices and its clear to see how comparing the nexus 7 to the Surface is kind of like comparing an Oldsmobile to a Lexus.

Go buy a nexus 7 if you prefer. Android certainly isn't going anywhere. Just don't pretend MS lost because it offers a product that simply offers more than Android can right now. Android has few synergies to benefit from. I frankly don't care if my phone chat syncs with my gmail web browser session.

Or that my phone remembers my PC chrome web page history.

It's just not that compelling. A cheap toy, sure, and good value. A Surface killer, lols no.


RE: stupid stupid price
By Reclaimer77 on 10/16/12, Rating: -1
RE: stupid stupid price
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/16/2012 2:45:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Surface killer? You say that like the Surface is some established product or something, like it's the iPad. It has to prove itself before you crown the damn thing man.
IKR... I was thinking the same...


RE: stupid stupid price
By NellyFromMA on 10/16/2012 4:44:43 PM , Rating: 2
Um, the product is coming out right? A scenario that would doom the procduct would be the kilelr right? Why am I sitting here trying to explain reading comprehension, its really sad.


RE: stupid stupid price
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/16/2012 6:17:22 PM , Rating: 2
Key words, coming out ...

As for your reading comprehension remark....well, people comprehend what you said...


RE: stupid stupid price
By NellyFromMA on 10/16/2012 4:43:50 PM , Rating: 1
Oh boy, my favorite person to reply to. No, I don't want the surface to succeed because it's "easier" to program for. Not sure why that's in quotes.

Lets try again. I truly beleive Surface will succeed because of the synergy it brings to the table across MS products and the ease with which we are seeing the convergence come to the table.

Android offers NOTHING in this dept. Apple on the otherhand has made substantial in roads here. I'm sorry if you love Android and take anything pro-anything other than Android to be some ignorant comment.

Fact is, I post with credibility and content, so maybe try addressing what I actually say and not what you take away from it.


RE: stupid stupid price
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/16/2012 4:45:24 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Fact is, I post with credibility and content, so maybe try addressing what I actually say and not what you take away from it.
Whos fact? Yours?


RE: stupid stupid price
By NellyFromMA on 10/16/2012 4:55:04 PM , Rating: 2
Again I struggle to understand wtf your point is. The statement is clear.


RE: stupid stupid price
By TakinYourPoints on 10/16/2012 5:37:25 PM , Rating: 2
If you present a fact then a standard cheesewiz reply is "that's your opinion" or something else similarly stupid along those lines.


RE: stupid stupid price
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/16/12, Rating: 0
RE: stupid stupid price
By Reclaimer77 on 10/16/2012 7:07:12 PM , Rating: 2
Dude don't even respond to bullshit like that. If you posted the exact same way, yet agreed with him, he wouldn't say a word about your "standard replies".


RE: stupid stupid price
By TakinYourPoints on 10/16/2012 7:07:23 PM , Rating: 2
I've seen you dismiss posts backed up by sales figures, growth numbers, and hard benchmarks as "opinion".

When people present real facts it isn't a different story, because that's exactly what you do.


RE: stupid stupid price
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/16/2012 6:24:11 PM , Rating: 2
Of course you do.... you saying YOURSELF is credible, not a fact...that's my point you dolt...


RE: stupid stupid price
By NellyFromMA on 10/17/2012 2:48:25 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, I'm the dolt... I'll refrain from responding to cheesew1z69, the beacon of logic.


RE: stupid stupid price
By TakinYourPoints on 10/16/2012 4:59:10 PM , Rating: 2
All your points here are solid. The Android defense force beings nothing but arguments based on emotion and rhetoric.

The people I know who hate Android the most aren't Apple fans, they're mobile developers. They hate Android with a passion due to the fact that it is a pain to develop for and it makes way less money than iOS. iOS is the most profitable platform to develop for and it is simple to debug due to the fact that the OS and hardware base is so unified.

WP is the easiest to develop for, it has the easiest SDK. The only thing holding it back is profitability, which is to say that it needs way more users. Windows 8 will bring in a slew of users, so we'll see how that helps on the WP8 side.


RE: stupid stupid price
By corduroygt on 10/16/2012 5:12:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Windows 8 will bring in a slew of users, so we'll see how that helps on the WP8 side

I'll guess little to none...I use Windows 8 and I will never use, let alone spend money on, a metro app. Full screen apps on a desktop/notebook outside of watching videos are stupid, that's why we have WINDOWS in the first place.

WP8 will have to prove itself on its own, which I think it will, but very slowly. It'll trickle with increased marketshare a couple percent every year.


RE: stupid stupid price
By TakinYourPoints on 10/16/2012 5:39:44 PM , Rating: 2
Same here, but having a gateway for Windows mobile developers on the desktop is better than having none at all. I don't expect an immediate success like iOS, but I do think it'll increase year-over-year at a steady pace.


RE: stupid stupid price
By Moishe on 10/17/2012 2:37:06 PM , Rating: 2
Good point... plus MS is looking at this as an entrance into ARM, which they need. The R&D alone is worth a lot.

I kind of see this as the first xBox. MS knows it needs to have a WinRT code base, a StoreFront, a genuine mobile strategy, and a team that can design quality devices (because the 3rd-party guys are hedging bets and half-assing it.)

As with the xBox, this version is a stepping stone. It's innovation, and that's a good thing, even if this particular device fails to take off.

The cries of "game over" the end is near" etc... are absurd and childish. That kind of attitude is what prevents people from succeeding. In business (and in life) if you give up at the first failure, you'll become nothing and your competitors will win.


RE: stupid stupid price
By Reclaimer77 on 10/16/2012 6:41:52 PM , Rating: 2
It doesn't matter who you say "hates" Android as long as nearly 70% of the mobile users in the world continue to buy into it. Those are the only people who matter in the end. I mean, at least your arguments would have some traction if this number stayed the same or went down, but it's only going up.

I'll leave you to ponder how you think it's possible for such an "inferior" platform to gain such a following. Or how it's so terrible for developers when it's the only platform that's even close to iOS in development out there.

But clearly these are "emotion and rhetoric", not actual critical thinking and common sense based on reality and statistics...


RE: stupid stupid price
By TakinYourPoints on 10/16/2012 9:55:01 PM , Rating: 2
I know exactly how its possible: More carriers with a huge range of cheaper devices. iOS internet traffic and app downloads make well almost two thirds of the mobile market, despite the fact that iOS makes up about a third of mobile devices out there. Google themselves testified in Congress that the bulk of their mobile revenue comes from iOS, not Android.

Lots of people have Android devices but many of them aren't on flagship devices, plain and simple. They aren't using them much more than they would a regular dumbphone. This matters to developers.

The large userbase is the only reason it is the #2 mobile development platform. If we were going by quality then Windows Phone would be far past it, given the fact that it has hands down the best SDK out there. Its low userbase, and thus lower potential for profits, means that it isn't the case.

Popular != good. Justin Beiber is one of the most popular artists in the world, that doesn't mean he's great.


RE: stupid stupid price
By Reclaimer77 on 10/16/2012 10:32:49 PM , Rating: 2
Very good excuses. Points for creativity.

quote:
This matters to developers.


I love how you think what developers think is more important than the end users. You're always bringing up developers and it's always a straw man. If Android only had a few thousands apps, sure that would be something. But as long as Android has a thriving app inventory and I can do everything I need to do, which I can, I could frankly give a damn about how much developers are making off which platform.

quote:
The large userbase is the only reason it is the #2 mobile development platform.


Duh? I believe I covered this when I brought up Androids market share. Somehow in your mind this disproves me lol.

quote:
If we were going by quality then Windows Phone would be far past it, given the fact that it has hands down the best SDK out there.


Right, Windows Phone. Which still doesn't have several of the "killer apps" being enjoyed by Android and iOS users. Once again things that nobody cares about outside of developers, you seem to think is important to everyone.

You want to have your cake and eat it too. And it's really amusing seeing you go through mental gymnastics to explain away things you don't like, and make excuses for things you do.


RE: stupid stupid price
By TakinYourPoints on 10/17/2012 4:27:11 PM , Rating: 2
It is really quite simple.

A popular platform gets applications no matter how difficult it is to develop for.

Developers generally dislike developing for Android because of piracy, software and hardware fragmentation, and dealing with resulting compatibility issues, all for less profit because Android users are less likely to pay up.

An unpopular platform doesn't get apps even if it is super simple to develop great apps for.

That is a separate point from why Android is popular, which is again is because it was earlier to market with cheap or free devices on almost every carrier. It doesn't mean that it is a good platform to develop for. The only one worse to develop for is BlackBerry. The userbase is the only reason Android development is as big as it is, which is impressive given how bad developing for it is in almost every way.

Its a simple point, even someone like you should be able to grasp it.


RE: stupid stupid price
By Reclaimer77 on 10/16/2012 6:48:56 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Lets try again. I truly beleive Surface will succeed because of the synergy it brings to the table across MS products and the ease with which we are seeing the convergence come to the table.


For that to happen Windows 8 would have to be a huge hit as a desktop OS, and MS would somehow have to tipple their mobile device market-share over what it is now. When exactly do you see this happening?

quote:
Android offers NOTHING in this dept.


That's a bit of an exaggeration. But for arguments sake, let's let that pass. This only proves that your premise is false when you state synergy is so important. If it was, Android wouldn't be where it is today.

It's not that I'm being "pro-Android", it's just I felt your logic and reasoning in your OP was based on personal bias, and not facts. Maybe in the next few years you will be eventually proven correct, but right now today, you just aren't.

The history of non-iPad tablets that entered the market at $500+ isn't pretty. Like I said, I think you're WAY premature in trying to crown it king.


RE: stupid stupid price
By Helbore on 10/16/2012 6:44:32 PM , Rating: 2
Whilst I do think the Surface is priced about $100 higher tha it should be, you are kinda underselling its specs.

Nexus 7 has 8 and 16GB of storage. Surface has 32 and 64GB, plus microSD. Plus USB2. Then there are the two cameras. The extra RAM. The optically-bonded screen. It also seems to have a higher quality production quality (and yes, I know we won't know for sure until we have it in our hands. But we also do know of certain quality issues that have plagued the Nexus 7). But all these little details soon add up.

The main reason surface is priced the way it is - I'm sure - is due to offsetting the fears of OEMs. Microsoft could have priced it lower, but knew doing so would upset their partners. Personally, I think that was a mistake and Ms should have at least offered Surface at a discount for the holiday period, just to encourage uptake of the platform. But I guess doing so would have alienated a lot of manufacturers who will also build cheaper Windows RT tablets.

Don't get me wrong, I think the price bracket you suggest is where it should have been placed. $350 with the touch cover included (extra for the type cover) was what I was expecting.

Having said that, Surface itself doesn't need to be a wild success. It's practically a physical piece of advertising for Windows 8 as a tablet OS. The fact that its been constantly talked about since its unveiling - even though there's been next-to-no further info on it until today just goes to show how successful its been at getting Windows 8 talked about by bloggers and tech journalists. If it sells poorly, but gets people buying cheaper Windows 8/RT devices instead, then it will have been a success.


RE: stupid stupid price
By Moishe on 10/17/2012 2:40:43 PM , Rating: 2
Spot on.

I was expecting about $500. MS isn't a budget player. They're not in the price game with the Nook, Kindles, and the 7.


RE: stupid stupid price
By Moishe on 10/17/2012 2:17:18 PM , Rating: 2
Ridiculous.

What they are doing is saying "We are not some cheap, third-party tablet."

They are positioning the Surface RT as a competitor to the ipad, not to the smaller, slower android tablets.

Now whether that will work is debatable, but anyone in business knows you have to put your product in a spot. Pricing is one way of doing that.

Personally, I think this price is a good spot for it.

Here is what gives it added value:
Free MS Office home/student 2013
MicroSD
Tegra30
1st-party keyboard

The keyboard price is in-line with competitors and it a first-party, well designed accessory, not an aftermarket or after thought like a some.
Transformer Prime keyboard is ~$110
iPad keyboard is ~$75


Yeah too expensive.
By Digimonkey on 10/16/2012 9:48:42 AM , Rating: 3
I was really hoping it'd be $500 with keyboard/dust cover. I think it's about $100 too expensive. Still will be looking forward to seeing reviews, but I'll probably hold out until the Pro version now is available.




RE: Yeah too expensive.
By LordSojar on 10/16/2012 9:51:21 AM , Rating: 2
Agreed. If it was $500 and included the cover/keyboard, then it would be a decent deal. If it was $399 and then $119 for the keyboard, it would still be a good deal. But this? No, too expensive, especially with not having a 1920x1200 display (hello ASUS Transformer Infinity @ the same pricing...)

Microsoft needs to reevaluate things immediately or in the very near future, or this is going to become another Windows Phone 7 launch for them.


RE: Yeah too expensive.
By Mitch101 on 10/16/2012 10:29:10 AM , Rating: 2
Yup im buying the Asus Q200E 11.6? Windows 8 notebook coming soon for $550 instead.
http://liliputing.com/2012/10/asus-q200e-11-6-wind...

1.4 GHz Intel Core i3 Sandy Bridge (second generation) CPU, 4GB of RAM, and a 500GB hard drive. It features 802.11n WiFi, Gigabit Ethernet, 1 USB 3.0 port, and 2 USB 2.0 ports.


RE: Yeah too expensive.
By othercents on 10/16/2012 10:54:34 AM , Rating: 2
I can't say that it is too expensive especially if you are comparing it to a similarly equipped iPad. The iPad 32gb is $599 and the "smart cover" is another $39 or $69 depending on which you choose. That is an extra $100 for the iPad compared to the Surface 32gb. The Surface 32gb is on par with the Asus 32gb Transformer Tablet (which you still have to pay extra for the keyboard). I would like to see what the pricing for the Asus RT will be.

At those prices and with the new iPad mini and other 7" Android options with proven technology and software availability, I don't see Microsoft selling very quickly. This is probably the year for the mini tablets.

Other


RE: Yeah too expensive.
By Labotomizer on 10/16/2012 11:08:06 AM , Rating: 2
I don't know, I think it's a smart move. If you're MS you can't undercut your OEMs by too much. It's also of extremely high build quality and with 32GB of storage it's interesting. It also has USB so any USB keyboard will work so I'm not sure I'd need the smart cover, but since I'll be ordering one on the work dollar I'll certainly get it with one.

With office support all I need is a Citrix Receiver, which I would imagine will come pretty quick, to make it a very solid offering for our sales staff. It's almost exactly what we need and at $600 it's cheaper than other options we've looked at, and we can control them using centralized management unlike the iPad. So it has some serious pluses.

But from a consumer standpoint? You might be right, I'll reserve judgement until I get it in my hands.


RE: Yeah too expensive.
By Manch on 10/16/2012 11:54:08 AM , Rating: 2
Couldnt agree with you more. About the central mgmt tho, there are options that will allow you to control a mix of Android & Ipad/phone products that works extremely well. Check out Fixmo.com. We're looking into this where I work at. Very interesting for companies looking for a BYOD solution, but also from a data security standpoint


RE: Yeah too expensive.
By Labotomizer on 10/16/2012 2:13:50 PM , Rating: 2
I agree, but BYOD is part of the problem. We're all about embracing it and assisting companies implement it but it's often more difficult than you would think. If I spend $700 on a tablet that's mine, I would have a hard time agreeing to load company software to control my device.

I think we'll see a push back on this over the years. As it is we have people removing Exchange accounts from their mobile devices because they know we can wipe the device when they are terminated, and in a handful of cases we've done so. I hate doing it but I prefer to keep my job so I do what the higher people want us to do.


RE: Yeah too expensive.
By TakinYourPoints on 10/16/2012 5:09:03 PM , Rating: 2
On the one hand you're getting 32GB, which is good at that price. On the other hand you're getting slower hardware with the Tegra 3 (why hasn't a replacement for this come out yet?) and a much lower res display.

Yeah, it really isn't price competitive with the iPad given that it is a lower quality device. More importantly, it doesn't have the momentum or brand recognition that the iPad does. It really should be priced less to better reflect the hardware that actually Surface has.


RE: Yeah too expensive.
By Moishe on 10/17/2012 2:26:48 PM , Rating: 2
Did you read the MS Surface team on reddit?

http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/11kyja/iam_p...

One of the things they addressed was the resolution. In my mind (techie) I tend to go for the "bigger is better" concept. I thought, geez, how can they compete with the retina display... but I see their reasoning behind the resolution and I respect it for what it is. Whether is works or not is yet to be seen.

One thing Surface has against it is that based on pure spec numbers, the Surface will look bad in a couple of ways. It may not mean anything in practical senses, but it's still a checkbox that some will use to compare.

On the other hand, most consumers won't even look at the checkbox. They'll see the device in person, the price, and the other benefits and make their judgement.


$100 for a cover? Microsoft must be joking
By tayb on 10/16/2012 10:25:58 AM , Rating: 2
The $100 extra for the cover is just a joke. $100 for a cover? Seriously MS? Do you even care about making a dent in this market or are you just doing it for the luls? I was interested in this model. Past tense.




RE: $100 for a cover? Microsoft must be joking
By Florinator on 10/16/2012 12:04:28 PM , Rating: 1
How about $100 for a keyboard, that also acts like a cover? Do you even know what you're talking about?


By Cheesew1z69 on 10/16/2012 12:11:21 PM , Rating: 2
I don't think he does...it baffled me when he posted that...


By tayb on 10/16/2012 12:21:56 PM , Rating: 2
I'm acutely aware that the cover doubles as a keyboard. This changes absolutely nothing about the price. The cover also lacks a magnetic closing latch which means it will just dangle freely when toting around the tablet. It's a ripoff.


By Netscorer on 10/16/2012 12:23:43 PM , Rating: 3
a crappy keyboard, you mean. Nobody in their right mind would be able to use it as their main keyboard.


By Florinator on 10/16/2012 5:24:22 PM , Rating: 2
I'll let you guys know how it works in about 10 days ;-)


By Moishe on 10/17/2012 2:46:16 PM , Rating: 2
It's a keyboard and trackpad... this isn't like a $30 ipad cover with magnets to tell the device when it's open or closed. It actually has a alternate function

And the keyboard is priced competitively with other attachable keyboards.

If you're going to put it down, at least put it down fairly so we can respect your opinion.


DOA
By sweatshopking on 10/16/12, Rating: 0
RE: DOA
By kleinma on 10/16/2012 10:11:00 AM , Rating: 2
You mean which isn't available at the 16GB iPad price.

The cost of surface RT with the cover is the same price as the iPad of the same storage capacity.

Surface RT also comes with Office bundled, so for those who are office heavy users, not having to purchase office for at least 100 dollars can also be weighed.

I personally do too much x86 work, and will be getting an OEM windows 8 tablet/convertable, or perhaps wait until surface pro.

Someone looking for a straight up tablet that can also be used for some work stuff, the WinRT pricing seems practicle.

Making it cheaper would have only been an attempt to undercut, both apple and OEMs making Win8 devices, but at the same time possibly make the device feel cheap.


RE: DOA
By Bubbacub on 10/16/2012 10:38:45 AM , Rating: 2
16gb of storage space does not cost $100


RE: DOA
By Bubbacub on 10/16/2012 10:41:25 AM , Rating: 2
i.e. they should be able to compete with apple at the $399 price point (esp given apple's large profit margin)


RE: DOA
By Moishe on 10/17/2012 2:28:51 PM , Rating: 2
Doesn't matter how much the components cost.


RE: DOA
By Ammohunt on 10/16/2012 11:05:48 AM , Rating: 2
I agree if this were the pricing for a Windows 8 Tablets then it would sell like gang busters. As it sits the average tablet user that is already entrenched in a proprietary platform(Apple) isn't going to abandon that platform to buy into a more expensive proprietary platform. So the market for RT tablets will be about the same as the market for Windows Phones; less than 10% of the total tablet market.


RE: DOA
By Manch on 10/16/2012 11:57:19 AM , Rating: 3
Bad example. Very few Apple users will abandon there faith for anything.


Too expensive.
By batjohn on 10/16/2012 9:50:08 AM , Rating: 2
No installed user base, no advantage of having an x86 compatible windows, no library available to speak of I believe (everything has to be rewrote or recompiled I think... could be wrong), less resolution than that iPad 3. What exactly makes Microsoft think that is a good price? Office for ARM processors on it? For the specs it seems like they could have sold it for a lot cheaper and still made money and had a chance.

That said I'm still looking forward to the Surface Pro.




RE: Too expensive.
By polishvendetta on 10/16/2012 11:33:14 AM , Rating: 3
There is a school of thought among artists and designers that you should price your work at what you think its worth. So Microsoft is branding this as a high end tablet so its priced as such.

In reference to several other comments, Androids whole marketing scheme is "hey were just as good as apple but cheaper". This works and is good for google due to the fact they were a search enging company branching into hardware. With these prices Microsoft is saying "were better then apple. peroid." I think this is a good stance.


RE: Too expensive.
By batjohn on 10/16/2012 12:11:10 PM , Rating: 3
There's a lot of starving artists out there (not to mention their business plan usually involves selling a few at a high price instead of a lot at small prices which doesn't work in the electronics world) and engineers have no say in pricing as far as I know other than to build something as cheap as possible. If it sells well good for them but I don't see a single thing that really that would push people in this things direction over the competition.


RE: Too expensive.
By batjohn on 10/16/2012 12:12:59 PM , Rating: 2
Read engineers instead of designers for some reason (similar I guess). Same still applies though. Designers have no say on price for the most part.


What an interesting experiment
By Tony Swash on 10/16/2012 12:55:19 PM , Rating: 1
Microsoft can see the writing on the wall - finally. The days of growth in the PC market are over, what looms is at best stagnation in units sold and probably gentle but persistent decline. On top of that the generous mark up for software that MS has enjoyed for so long will also decline as the vast inexpensive app markets come to dominate and define software pricing.

So now Microsotf has to do two very difficult things at once, both things it has never done before.

One is to make and sell hardware at a reasonable profit and in numbers that matter. Selling lots of units is doable if you reduce the price until the profit disappears but that is not a road Microsoft can embrace this time round. If Microsoft is to successfully reengineer it's business for the post-PC world and shift from being a company that makes it's money from software to one that makes money from selling hardware it cannot sell at cost, it must make a profit on the hardware it sells. This becomes even more critical given the fact that a move by Microsoft into hardware is also a move away from it's OEMs no matter what Microsoft says about it. As soon as MS starts selling hardware it calls into question it's OEM ecosystem partnerships and raises the very real risk that a move towards a new business model (hardware) will undermine and disrupt the old business (software licences+OEMs).

So MS must make profits on Surface now and that is a hard thing to do because it is up against competitors such as Apple, with four decades of hardware experience and with the planet's best supply chain, and Amazon and Google, who can both continue to sell at cost because they make their income from services (their hardware is just a gateway to their services).

The second very hard thing that Microsoft has to do is to enter markets (phones, tablets) where it is a tiny bit player and carve out a profitable and successful niche for itself without the benefits of incumbency that it has enjoyed for so long in the PC world. Microsoft hasn't really had much experience at doing that, of entering and growing and making profits in existing markets. The Xbox in the console market wasn't really the same because Microsoft could sell it at cost (in fact make a pretty big loss when all it's capital costs are factored in) because it was seen as loss leader forging an entry to the lucrative living room. Microsoft is not looking for another loss leader, it's looking for another profit centre.

Microsoft's strategic response to this new challenge, of entering and succeeding in a new market full of dynamic incumbents, was Windows 8, an attempt lever it's position in the PC market to build instant installed base so that it's tablet and phone offerings could ride the on the back of it's PC business and attract developers, enterprise customers and generate some traction. It might work but the danger is that in reshaping Widows 8 to help its touch based devices MS will kill the goose that, for now, is still laying the golden eggs. If Windows 8 causes a stutter in it's desktop market whilst not leading to a tablet and phone take off MS could find itself in a difficult position.

The next eighteen months are going to be very tense times at Redmond as they wait to see if it all pans out.

How very interesting.




RE: What an interesting experiment
By PsychoPif on 10/16/2012 1:49:53 PM , Rating: 4
Yes it's a big transition for MS, but you got one thing wrong.

Just like Apple and Google, MS get his own marketplace with a 20-30% cut from everything sold there. It's also a great opportunity to promote Bing, Skype, Skydrive, etc. It also consolidate the whole ecosystem. XBox, Windows Phone, Surface, Windows 8. A user can have a real integrated experience with MS starting octobre 26th.

It also has a lot of experience from XBox, a device many said would tank, yet is now the #1 console on the market. Don't underestimate them.


RE: What an interesting experiment
By 91TTZ on 10/16/2012 2:36:54 PM , Rating: 2
The problem is that many people don't want an "integrated experience". They just want a damn PC or tablet that does what they want it to.

Right now we're not locked into any crazy agreement with Microsoft as far as software distribution goes. Anyone can make a Windows compatible program and distribute it on their own site for free. If Microsoft wants to take a 40% chunk of whatever you make, nobody is going to use that method compared to the free method.


By Tony Swash on 10/16/2012 3:15:59 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Just like Apple and Google, MS get his own marketplace with a 20-30% cut from everything sold there. It's also a great opportunity to promote Bing, Skype, Skydrive, etc. It also consolidate the whole ecosystem. XBox, Windows Phone, Surface, Windows 8. A user can have a real integrated experience with MS starting octobre 26th.


The problem is that the digital content does not generate big profits, in fact it's little more than break even. Even iTunes is not much better than a break even operation designed to add value to hardware (where Apple's profit are made). Amazon who sell a vast emporium of stuff only make razor thin margins doing it. Google of course makes plenty of money on its ads business but all the indicators are that that is primarily still a desktop/browser operation and that ad profits from mobile devices are elusive for Google.

So what on the content side offers Microsoft sizeable profits?

Remember that Microsoft needs to develop a big new profit center in the new mobile market if it is not to see it's growth stagnate along with the PC market. It's that imperative that is driving both Windows 8 and Surface.


RE: What an interesting experiment
By Moishe on 10/17/2012 2:50:15 PM , Rating: 2
At least you're the same guy. That's cool.

Apple innovates (or not), you love it.
Microsoft innovates (or not), you hate it.

Predictable.


Pricing
By mchentz on 10/16/2012 10:09:03 AM , Rating: 2
I would like one of these but I'm thinking at that price I will just go with a W8 Laptop. What a shame about the pricing. I was hoping for a $399 for the whole kit and Kaboodle. I could almost see $499 but now we are just getting to high for what it is, an item to consume content. On the RT version I suspect that content creation will be difficult.

I do plan on getting a new Kindle HD 8.9" for my wife at $399 though.




RE: Pricing
By Florinator on 10/16/2012 12:07:37 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, 'cause the Kindle is great for content creation ;-)


RE: Pricing
By Moishe on 10/17/2012 2:59:04 PM , Rating: 2
A lot of what you say is true, and the fact that you lay out your perspective is good. i.e. $500 as a "content" machine is high (for you).

I think that tablets are generally seen as non-productive devices, even by people who own them. An onscreen keyboard is the big reduction in functionality.

I have a different perspective, which drives my price threshold.
I won't buy a tablet to consume content on. I have a phone that has the internet, news, youtube, txt, email, netflix, etc. I don't need or want to spend $500 to read on. I will however pay good money for a tablet that lets me get part (or most) of the way into productivity on the go. The Surface keyboard and MS Office are a huge added value in this perspective.

I think that Microsoft is clearly avoid the "cheap" market and targeting those who want to stay in the Microsoft and/or productivity ecosystem. I think that's a pretty good sized market.


MS pulled the web site
By Gungel on 10/16/2012 10:03:22 AM , Rating: 2
Microsoft just pulled the web site. Maybe a purpose leak to see what reaction thy will receive from the press and customers.




RE: MS pulled the web site
By Florinator on 10/16/2012 5:28:02 PM , Rating: 2
Hmmm, I just pre-ordered this thing a few minutes ago, which site did you try?


That ad...
By BugblatterIII on 10/16/2012 12:24:55 PM , Rating: 3
So I guess it clicks then.

Erm, anything else you'd like to tell us about it Microsoft?




It does have office
By DFranch on 10/16/2012 10:13:07 AM , Rating: 2
It does come with office, so if that is important to you, then $500 isn't a bad price. Many people could care less about Office, and will not want to spend the extra $50-$100.




pricing is too much
By Rage187 on 10/16/2012 11:57:13 AM , Rating: 2
ugh, Microsoft has to shoot themselves in the foot the one time they have a chance to compete. I was going to recommend the RT at $299 to our software users but $499 is entirely too much. Now all I'll hear is "why would I spend that when I can get an iPad with twice the resolution for just as much?" ...Well, it has a USB port! <crickets>




Mmm
By Florinator on 10/16/2012 12:00:51 PM , Rating: 2
Take my money, please!




When I think about it
By vol7ron on 10/16/2012 9:51:57 PM , Rating: 2
The thing I dislike most about Windows8...

... probably the 2D icons. I like the freeflow of the view screen, but those 2-color square graphics scream anything other than fluid or attractive




Typical
By Visual on 10/17/2012 3:55:38 AM , Rating: 2
I do not want to argue about if the base model is worth the $500 it starts at or not... perhaps it could be justified, if it turned out the OS is as epic as it is hyped. Not the first time an MS OS adds $100-200 to a product. I did expect a lower price, being that it is a first-party product, but at least this leaves room for other manufacturers to compete fairly.

I do know however that an extra 32GB SSD capacity does not cost $100, nor does a crappy cheapo keyboard flap. Again, it is not unusual for extras and accessories for a product to be way overpriced. Much like the extras for X-box like HDDs or flash drives, remotes, controllers, controller batteries and chargers and whatever. Even Apple accessories follow this model.

No matter how much I personally despise it, such strategy can work quite well when you effectively have full control and a "monopoly" for providing accessories for a given platform. But it is a serious mistake to use that strategy here before the platform in question has even been launched, let alone established itself.

I could probably get over the overpriced base model, or the overpriced upgrades/extras, but not both at once. Hell no.




PRICE
By DrChemist on 10/17/2012 1:09:18 PM , Rating: 2
iPAD 3 (32GB WIFI) - $599 (No Keyboard or Cover)

MS Surface (32GB WIFI) - $499 (No Keyboard or Cover)
w/ cover + keyboard +$100
($599)

So if you want to do the same as the iPad 3 w/o the cool keyboard it's $100 cheaper. In fact it is the same price as the iPad 2 which has 1024x768 resolution. So far the Surface is comparable in price to the iPad 2 and is better than that.

Quit the moaning and see the rational. $300? are you serious? The parts cost that much alone for each one. $400 would have been an aggressive price point. Realize you are buying something that can do pretty much most of everything you do on a laptop and be business productive

The real thing is that they should have made a 16Gb version to have the agressive $399 price point, but my guess is that with Full Office 15 and everything it probably would have left it with <6 Gb of space free.




By Kyuu on 10/16/2012 3:44:22 PM , Rating: 2
... What? The SurfaceRT is not more expensive than the iPad. What are you tripping on?

Hint: compare it against the *current* iPad. I have no idea why people are comparing pricing against the *old* iPad.


By Taft12 on 10/16/2012 4:36:48 PM , Rating: 2
At Best Buy the price of entry on the sticker will be the same. It's all consumers will care about.


"If a man really wants to make a million dollars, the best way would be to start his own religion." -- Scientology founder L. Ron. Hubbard

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki