http://www.zdnet.com/how-microsofts-surface-pro-3-marketing-push-backfired-7000030723/
Finally a well thought out article in addition to Paul Thurrott's review. On one hand, MS did bring it on themselves. On the other hand, I'm tired of people complaining about typing on their laps. A world where I have to spend 90% of my typing time with a device on my lap is my nightmare.
Reviewers seemed to cherry pick comparisons to down the SP3 wherever possible if they were already predisposed to dislike.
Reviewer: "Sure it's a tablet, but the iPad has more/better apps"
Microsoft: "Sure it doesn't have the selection/quality but it's a full blown PC!"
Reviewer: "Yeah, but the MacBook Air has a better keyboard"
Microsoft: "Yes, but it's also more portable, it even has a pen for notes and drawing"
Reviewer: "Well, sure it has a pen if you don't accidentally lose it."
Microsoft: "Well, your MacBook Air would have terrible battery life if you lost the charger.."
Reviewer:"But I wouldn't lose it because I like my MacBook Air"
Microsoft: "What do you people want?!?!?"
Not many reviewers care to talk about what a device does well/poorly in a universal sense. They talk about their personal use case and those that they are familiar with. Which is totally fine, I understand their personal bias and can interpret what I need.
It just stinks that 100% tech journalists are just tech journalists. None of them have productivity needs outside of word processing and web-use.