10 ms·

Surface: Between a Rock and a Hardware Place

53 points by blutonium 14y ago

latch 14y ago
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_choice.html http://www.ted.com/talks/barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_ch...
- SoftwareMaven 14y ago
  I agree (about too much choice). Opinions make great products (think Apple, python, 37 Signals), but Microsoft appears to be trying to hedge their bets in every regard. Unfortunately, that rarely (if ever) works out. That said, if it can do what they claimed and the price isn't stupid, I'll have one (then replace my MacBook Air with a MBPro). I'm not holding my breath, though. I've lost all faith in "product announcements" that don't actually have the product. MS has all of the engineering talent to make this happen. I'm far from convinced that they have the leadership talent to make Surface a true success[1]. 1. In this case, true success means taking an appreciative percentage of the market and inspiring changes in competitors' products (meaning they are thought leaders). MS is so large in the enterprise space that they may be able to turn this into many sales, but that doesn't mean they will be the ones pulling us into the future.
- gnaffle 14y ago
  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.
- antidoh 14y ago
  "What about the Zune, Kin and Xbox." They abandoned two of those.
- ZeroGravitas 14y ago
  People who actually owned one seemed to quite like the Zune. On the other hand if we're calling it a disaster based on amount of money made then the XBox project still has to prove itself on that score, it's not totally clear that they've made back their $10+ Billion investment yet (in part because of poor hardware QA)
Tloewald 14y ago
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 14y ago
  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 14y ago
    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...
  - antidoh 14y ago
    "But why did they have to demo it now" Someone with power allowed their ego to make that decision. It must be now, because of something that some other company is or isn't doing. Damn the engineering, full speed ahead.
- marknutter 14y ago
  It crashing during the presentation was a disaster and you could see it in the presenter's face. Man was that uncomfortable to watch. To me, it kind of summed the whole presentation; this is a hugely important moment for Microsoft, and they have a lot riding on the success of this tablet, yet they're rushing it to market. It's clearly not ready for primetime. It'll be interesting to see how the next few months play out.
rlu 14y ago
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 14y ago
  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.
judofyr 14y ago
> 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 14y ago
  Different reasons to avoid him for me. The 5by5 shenanigans put me right off him.
  - cubicle67 14y ago
    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 14y ago
      Here[http://www.candlerblog.com/2012/05/18/where-did-the-talk-show-go/ http://www.candlerblog.com/2012/05/18/where-did-the-talk-sho...] and [http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3993649 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3993649] .
- pooriaazimi 14y ago
  I like Daring Fireball specifically it's opinionated. I'm not saying I'm a big fan of Gruber's (I never listened to his Talk Show, and removed him from my "daily" reading list because I consider what he did to 5by5 unethical, but I read him every few days because he's a fan of Kubrick, and finds great links). I just don't want to be represented with spec sheets and charts over and over and over again. Tech blogs and columns mostly repeat the same thing (what you almost always know), and when they tell you about their feelings, they're usually really narrow-minded and most of the time fail to understand their use cases (them being some sort of "journalist") differs dramatically with most people's ("iPad's gonna fail because it doesn't have hardware keyboards, which means I have to bring a keyboard with me when I'm going to conferences 6-7 times a month").
jroseattle 14y ago
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.
- SoftwareMaven 14y ago
  I disagree. If you can't tell a coherent story to people who are actively trying to fill in the gaps mentally, how will you tell it to the average Joe? The disconnects imply that MS doesn't understand how to communicate with the non-technical, "buy stuff because it feels right" crowd. Instead, they try to market to everyone, and when you try to market to everyone, you succeed in marketing to nobody.
  - shriphani 14y ago
    Most people probably watch the ads on TV or somesuch and don't bother with keynotes. Also, keynotes are hit-and-miss for everyone (including apple) and as such nobody has the time to sit and watch 45 mins of random people talking.
- NaOH 14y ago
  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.
bambax 14y ago
> 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 14y ago
  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?
- 14y ago
fauigerzigerk 14y ago
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!
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- technoslut 14y ago
  I didn't downvote you but it would be helpful you cited flaws in the article.
  - fauigerzigerk 14y ago
    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.
- antidoh 14y ago
  It's OK, the discussion that he generated here on HN is well worth whatever flaws are in his post.
daliusd 14y ago
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.
NeutronBoy 14y ago
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.
quadhome 14y ago
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 14y ago
"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 14y ago
  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.
ekianjo 14y ago
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 14y ago
  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 14y ago
    > 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.
martinkallstrom 14y ago
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 14y ago
  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 14y ago
    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.
- AllenKids 14y ago
  Really there is very little worth mentioning beside the keyboard covers. And Microsoft does not allow anyone to touch the keyboard covers. Whose fault is that? It is not record setting thin, or impossibly light, it has worse screen than the retina iPad, battery life is not mentioned at all, neither is th price,the look is quite minimalist and good, but not new or stunningly interesting ... pray tell, what's so awesome about the hardware? The glorious kickstand?
  - steverb 14y ago
    The fact that with the Pro Version I can run whatever software on it I want. We are salivating over these at an enterprise level as it solves several major problems for us (if they work as advertised). It means that rather than buying sales types an Air/Ultrabook along with supporting their iPad/Android we can buy them the surface pro and hand them a Windows Phone and have easy integration. Microsoft understands the enterprise market.
Tichy 14y ago
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.
ZeroGravitas 14y ago
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 14y ago
"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.

53 points by blutonium 14y ago

latch 14y ago

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_choice.html http://www.ted.com/talks/barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_ch...

SoftwareMaven 14y ago
I agree (about too much choice). Opinions make great products (think Apple, python, 37 Signals), but Microsoft appears to be trying to hedge their bets in every regard. Unfortunately, that rarely (if ever) works out. That said, if it can do what they claimed and the price isn't stupid, I'll have one (then replace my MacBook Air with a MBPro). I'm not holding my breath, though. I've lost all faith in "product announcements" that don't actually have the product. MS has all of the engineering talent to make this happen. I'm far from convinced that they have the leadership talent to make Surface a true success[1]. 1. In this case, true success means taking an appreciative percentage of the market and inspiring changes in competitors' products (meaning they are thought leaders). MS is so large in the enterprise space that they may be able to turn this into many sales, but that doesn't mean they will be the ones pulling us into the future.
gnaffle 14y ago
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.
antidoh 14y ago
"What about the Zune, Kin and Xbox." They abandoned two of those.
ZeroGravitas 14y ago
People who actually owned one seemed to quite like the Zune. On the other hand if we're calling it a disaster based on amount of money made then the XBox project still has to prove itself on that score, it's not totally clear that they've made back their $10+ Billion investment yet (in part because of poor hardware QA)

Tloewald 14y ago

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 14y ago
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 14y ago
  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...
- antidoh 14y ago
  "But why did they have to demo it now" Someone with power allowed their ego to make that decision. It must be now, because of something that some other company is or isn't doing. Damn the engineering, full speed ahead.
marknutter 14y ago
It crashing during the presentation was a disaster and you could see it in the presenter's face. Man was that uncomfortable to watch. To me, it kind of summed the whole presentation; this is a hugely important moment for Microsoft, and they have a lot riding on the success of this tablet, yet they're rushing it to market. It's clearly not ready for primetime. It'll be interesting to see how the next few months play out.

rlu 14y ago

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 14y ago
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.

judofyr 14y ago

> 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 14y ago
Different reasons to avoid him for me. The 5by5 shenanigans put me right off him.
- cubicle67 14y ago
  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 14y ago
    Here[http://www.candlerblog.com/2012/05/18/where-did-the-talk-show-go/ http://www.candlerblog.com/2012/05/18/where-did-the-talk-sho...] and [http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3993649 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3993649] .
pooriaazimi 14y ago
I like Daring Fireball specifically it's opinionated. I'm not saying I'm a big fan of Gruber's (I never listened to his Talk Show, and removed him from my "daily" reading list because I consider what he did to 5by5 unethical, but I read him every few days because he's a fan of Kubrick, and finds great links). I just don't want to be represented with spec sheets and charts over and over and over again. Tech blogs and columns mostly repeat the same thing (what you almost always know), and when they tell you about their feelings, they're usually really narrow-minded and most of the time fail to understand their use cases (them being some sort of "journalist") differs dramatically with most people's ("iPad's gonna fail because it doesn't have hardware keyboards, which means I have to bring a keyboard with me when I'm going to conferences 6-7 times a month").

jroseattle 14y ago

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.

SoftwareMaven 14y ago
I disagree. If you can't tell a coherent story to people who are actively trying to fill in the gaps mentally, how will you tell it to the average Joe? The disconnects imply that MS doesn't understand how to communicate with the non-technical, "buy stuff because it feels right" crowd. Instead, they try to market to everyone, and when you try to market to everyone, you succeed in marketing to nobody.
- shriphani 14y ago
  Most people probably watch the ads on TV or somesuch and don't bother with keynotes. Also, keynotes are hit-and-miss for everyone (including apple) and as such nobody has the time to sit and watch 45 mins of random people talking.
NaOH 14y ago
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.

bambax 14y ago

> 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 14y ago
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?
14y ago

fauigerzigerk 14y ago

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!

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
technoslut 14y ago
I didn't downvote you but it would be helpful you cited flaws in the article.
- fauigerzigerk 14y ago
  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.
antidoh 14y ago
It's OK, the discussion that he generated here on HN is well worth whatever flaws are in his post.

daliusd 14y ago

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.

NeutronBoy 14y ago

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.

quadhome 14y ago

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 14y ago

"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 14y ago
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.

ekianjo 14y ago

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 14y ago
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 14y ago
  > 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.

martinkallstrom 14y ago

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 14y ago
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 14y ago
  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.
AllenKids 14y ago
Really there is very little worth mentioning beside the keyboard covers. And Microsoft does not allow anyone to touch the keyboard covers. Whose fault is that? It is not record setting thin, or impossibly light, it has worse screen than the retina iPad, battery life is not mentioned at all, neither is th price,the look is quite minimalist and good, but not new or stunningly interesting ... pray tell, what's so awesome about the hardware? The glorious kickstand?
- steverb 14y ago
  The fact that with the Pro Version I can run whatever software on it I want. We are salivating over these at an enterprise level as it solves several major problems for us (if they work as advertised). It means that rather than buying sales types an Air/Ultrabook along with supporting their iPad/Android we can buy them the surface pro and hand them a Windows Phone and have easy integration. Microsoft understands the enterprise market.

Tichy 14y ago

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.

ZeroGravitas 14y ago

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 14y ago

"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.