Print 78 comment(s) - last by theokan.. on Feb 12 at 11:26 PM

Surface Pro is full of compromises

Microsoft's Surface RT hasn't exactly set the consumer tablet market ablaze since it was introduced late last year. According to IDC, Microsoft only shipped about 900,000 Surface RT tablets for Q4 2012 compared to 22.9 million for the iPad.
Despite a slow start with Surface RT, Microsoft is hoping for more success with its Surface Pro. Packing in a third generation Core i5 processor instead of the more limiting ARM-based processor its more svelte sibling, the Surface Pro can handle the vast Windows app library without breaking a sweat.
Even though Surface Pro isn't due to launch until February 9, reviews for the tablet went live tonight. Not surprisingly, reviewers loved the tablet's screen and its speedy Core i5 processor, but blasted the horrid battery life that puts it at the bottom of the pack.

The Surface Pro’s 10.6”, 1080p screen is a definite upgrade from the 1366x768 screen on the Surface RT. The reviewers seemed to be thoroughly impressed with its quality.
David Pierce/The Verge: The 10.6-inch, 1920 x 1080 panel on the Pro is gorgeous, maybe the best laptop screen I've ever seen. Blacks are deep and whites are bright (my MacBook Air's display looks comparatively yellowish now), and colors are both accurate and vibrant. Since it's 1080p, it also holds up to closer pixel-level scrutiny when you're holding the device nearer to your face in tablet mode.
But while the screen looks good, actual usability is a compromise between two extremes.
Tim Stevens/Engadget: By default, the tablet is set to scale text to 150 percent its original size, making most (but not all) menus and buttons huge and reasonably finger-friendly. That's great when you're actually using your fingers, but it results in a lot of wasted space on the display when you're using a mouse. More troublingly, it made the text and icons in many apps appear rather blurry…
When running apps at 100 percent, the visuals are much cleaner, and those who want maximum screen real estate will be happiest here -- but in this view scrollbars and other on-screen controls are tricky to hit accurately with a finger. Interacting with the desktop without a mouse suddenly becomes a chore.
The Surface Pro packs in a 1.7GHz Intel Core i5-3317u processor, 4GB of RAM, Intel integrated graphics, and an SSD (64GB or 128GB). Compared to the ARM processor used in the Surface RT, the Core i5 simply blazes along in performance.
Joanna Stern/ABC News: The Surface Pro does a nice job running lots of apps simultaneously. Powered by a Core i5 processor, 4GB of RAM and the 64GB solid-state drive, the Pro is just as capable and fast as most laptops. Programs load quickly and, in contrast to the Surface RT, there's none of that lag or stuttering when switching apps or swiping them in from the left. It also resumes from sleep in seconds and boots in under 10 seconds.
David Pierce/The Verge: In general, it runs remarkably smoothly. I consistently switch around between a dozen different apps, some streaming music or movies, and the Surface Pro never stumbled once in normal use — I was actually shocked at how quickly it would resume playing House of Cards on Netflix when I alt-tabbed my way back to the app. Where the Surface RT took forever to load anything, and stumbled its way through any kind of intensive task, the Pro simply flies.

Battery Life
When it comes to battery life, this is where the Surface Pro seemed to take the most criticism. The Surface Pro racked in anywhere from one-third to one-half the battery life of its Surface RT counterpart.
Michael Prospero/Laptop Magazine: Microsoft estimated that the battery life of the Surface Pro would be about half that of the Surface RT, and sadly, they were correct. On the LAPTOP Battery Test (Web surfing via Wi-Fi), the Pro lasted 4 hours and 37 minutes. That's about three hours less than the Surface RT (7:43), and about two-and-a-half hours less than the tablet average of 7:10.
Tim Stevens/Engadget: On our standard Windows battery rundown test, in which we fix the display brightness and loop a video endlessly to exhaustion, the Surface Pro scored just three hours and 46 minutes, despite having a 42.5Wh battery -- a third larger than the 31.5Wh pack in the Surface RT. That's just more than a third of the nine hours and 36 minutes the Surface RT scored, well lower than the similarly specced W700 (which managed seven hours) and short of every touch-friendly Windows 8 device we've yet tested.
CNET: If only the Surface Pro had excellent battery life. It doesn't. In our video-playback battery drain test, the Surface Pro lasted 4 hours and 31 minutes, regardless of whether the Type Cover was connected or not. That's not far off from some other high-powered 11- and 10-inch ultraportables, but it's a big step down the 6-hour mark on many ultrabooks. The Acer Iconia W700 lasted more than 7 hours despite having a similar processor.
By all accounts, the Surface Pro is a significant [second] step for Microsoft in the realm of tablet/convertible PCs. Performance is respectable, the screen is gorgeous (although legibility/usability could use some work), build quality/design is top notch, and it offers a decent allotment of ports/connectivity options. The overall weight/size, awkward typing positioning while on your lap, and the battery life will be big concerns, however, for many users. In summary, perhaps David Pierce of The Verge said it best:

Even a well-executed Surface still doesn't work for me, and I'd bet it doesn't work for most other people either. It's really tough to use on anything but a desk, and the wide, 16:9 aspect ratio pretty severely limits its usefulness as a tablet anyway. It's too big, too fat, and too reliant on its power cable to be a competitive tablet, and it's too immutable to do everything a laptop needs to do. In its quest to be both, the Surface is really neither. It's supposed to be freeing, but it just feels limiting.
We eagerly await Surface Pro2

Comments     Threshold

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

By Tony Swash on 2/7/2013 8:40:04 AM , Rating: 0
The whole of the corporate culture at Apple for over two decades has been dominated by just one key strategic aim: protect the brand. The great fear at Apple was that something unforeseen would come along and disrupt the Apple hegemony. That fear was so deep and all pervasive that it meant that when it was clear that the competitor mobile device markets were on the point of exploding in size and value Apple hesitated innovating for far too long and then made a timid defensive move with patent lawsuits.

It tried to defend iPhone and the result was the compromise that is iPhone 5. It is painfully clear that the shortcoming of iPhone 5 stem from it trying to do the same job at the same time as the iPhone 4, drive touch based devices and drive down traditional PCs, and the result is that each new product experience, the iPhone 4 and the iPhone 5, are compromised to be the same. It would have been far better to innovate on iOS but Apple, consumed by it's embedded defensive culture of brand and lack of ideas, was worried that Android would disrupt Apple iOS and so it tried disastrously to sue Android manufacturers.

Apple are making a truly profound strategic blunder. And that blunder underpins all that is wrong with Apple iPhone 5 and it's the reason that Apple will be declining player of consequence in the mobile device markets.

Congratulations on the clever word play, shame about the delusional thinking. Ironically Apple are the only PC era company company that has made the jump to being a successful player in the mobile device markets. And not just successful but the most successful achieving in the year just ended the most successful results of any company ever.

I know that some people really want Apple to falter but talking up fantasies about Apple stumbling, or hitting the bumpers. or being in some sort of trouble will only lead to disappointment when reality intrudes. Apple is huge, is hugely successful, is going to get a lot bigger and more successful and it will be the dominant company in the mobile markets for years to come. My advice is to accept the unpalatable truth or suffer years of disorientation and let down.

The topic here is why Microsoft so comprehensively dropped the ball on mobile, why it so badly it got it wrong.

By simsony on 2/7/2013 2:50:17 PM , Rating: 2

My point is a little off topic, I do think MS has screwed up, but the commentary you made was so easy to substitute with any company on the decline I couldn't resist.

And that is Apple, the decline is in their product experience. Profits are a lagging indicator especially for brand and marketing leveraged sales.

And the lawsuits ARE a strategic blunder on Apple's part.

MS once was doing as well, breaking records and profits. Look at where they are now. These things you say of Apple today are just as applicable to MS in their heyday of the Windows/Office/Internet boom era.

Unless Apple again starts doing the things that got them to where they are, they're on the way to join MS.

You and your Asymco analysis keep promising something big, Apple actually needs to pull the rabbit out of the magic hat. So far all I hear is of this magic hat hidden somewhere and requiring a lot of capex.

If it's iTV great! Let's see it. No more "it's going to get soooo big, you'll see".

It's gonna be three years since the iPhone 4, the last real thing they did.

Time for less talk.

"DailyTech is the best kept secret on the Internet." -- Larry Barber

Copyright 2015 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki