So surface buyers apparently don't care about application performance, app selection and image quality? What do they care about then?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Surface |OT|
- Thread starter strata8
- Start date
So surface buyers apparently don't care about application performance, app selection and image quality? What do they care about then?
Souless_PJ
Banned
USB ports and Office?
LukasTaves
Member
Actually, cpu performance on Surface should be about twice of the ipad mini for multi threaded applications. It has twice as many processors, and they are all based on the same architecture...
Edit: Unless that fish test is somehow hardware accelerated, then it should be faster on the ipad mini because it has a better gpu than tegra 3's.
I agree, the surface should have been a lot closer in performance to the new ipad.
MS fucked up and they know it. I just don't know how they can catch up to apple regarding apps and display.
How could they blow billions on advertising yet not put a better display and gpu in the surface?
If you can't match apple on the app store front at release then they should have sucked up the money and give us better specs.
But side by side how can you expect the shopper pick your device when one beats it on features alone?
MS fucked up and they know it. I just don't know how they can catch up to apple regarding apps and display.
How could they blow billions on advertising yet not put a better display and gpu in the surface?
If you can't match apple on the app store front at release then they should have sucked up the money and give us better specs.
But side by side how can you expect the shopper pick your device when one beats it on features alone?
Xplatformer
Member
Don't forget Metro interface, quality hardware and expandable storage.
Xplatformer
Member
Wait...are people not purchasing the Surface RT?
I got mine on day one and returned mine as well. I love the form factor and the keyboard but was very disappointed in the graphics performance on even the simplest of games. Plus there are a bunch of apps that I wish were there like a torrent program and a half way decent media player (the included one sucks ass). I'll try the Samsung ATIV Smart PC. Hopefully that offers better performance. If only I could find the damn thing.
It's not that simple. No OS on earth can magically take single-threaded applications and perfectly split them between cores.
The multi-core Tegra chip in Surface enables smoother multitasking. It's why Surface can load 10 IE tabs in the background - fully loaded and rendered IE tabs - without affecting performance of the foreground tab you're looking at. It's also why the side-by-side snapped view enables smooth 720p video playback at the same time as you're playing a game, without sacrificing the performance (much) for either, with both showing on-screen at the same time.
Overall though, the iPad's GPU is a massive behemoth that dwarfs pretty much all other comparable tablets in both performance and size.
What I can't fathom is that surely MS knew that the youtube sites would show the surface and ipad side by side doing benchmarks tests so why would a company like MS who appear to be betting everything on W8, surface, Wphone8 with the metro interface, let the ipad beat them on this?
All they had to do was beef up the GPU so why wouldn't they? It's as if this surface RT is nothing more than a public beta to test the waters before surface 2.
All they had to do was beef up the GPU so why wouldn't they? It's as if this surface RT is nothing more than a public beta to test the waters before surface 2.
plagiarize
Banned
I didn't buy a surface to run HTML5 benchmarks on it. It runs everything I want to run on it really well, and it's multitasking abilities dwarf any other tablet I've used AND it's many times better for productivity. I don't just read the internet, I post a lot on GAF. I write stories. I want a tablet that I can do those things on without any problem.
Games... I don't really need. Angry Birds Star Wars and Hydro Thunder show that it's capable, I think it just needs games designed around this hardware specification and that hasn't really happened yet. Strong sales will change that (and are hopefully happening). it's honestly one of the best pieces of hardware I've ever bought. I have no worry at all handling it, it doesn't feel like a fragile thing, but it feels precious at the same time. Finger prints aren't even a big issue. yep, it's not the table to buy yet if you're into gaming on a tablet. that might yet change though.
Oh, it's the obnoxious Apple guy on youtube again.
As a Windows Phone user, I'm used to my devices getting outperformed in benchmarks pretty much all of the time. But people tend to take performance benchmarks as an indicative as the whole platform and that's just missing the point. It's what you can do with the device with that performance that matters. If you're so simple minded to judge a device and a whole OS just by one of the many things that it can perform, well go ahead, keep on chasing that carrot.
For me, I don't really care about Office being on the Surface. What is awesome for me about the Surface is that I can consume content on this device almost as fast as on my desktop computer due to it's multitasking model, user interface, swipe gestures, and snap modes. What slows me down a bit compared to the desktop is no site-specific zoom levels, scrolling down long pages take longer compared to a scroll wheel, not being as fast at opening multiple tabs, and websites with a lot of small touch targets. Even with those, I don't find myself wanting the Desktop to consume content because I can bring my Surface almost everywhere and touch is still better for speed in general navigation and to navigate Metro.
Being able to consume content this fast on a device meant for touch is awesome. So how about you benchmark the speed of switching apps and multitasking in the Surface vs. other tablets? Would you judge a whole device by that then?
Edit: Oh yeah, another thing that really helps on content consumption is that I don't need to transfer content from my server or my other computers. All content I have is accessible through the network and I never have to think of how to transfer that content over to my tablet device. This is definitely not applicable to everyone, but this makes the Surface not another device I have to independently manage. It just needs to play mkv files though...
As a Windows Phone user, I'm used to my devices getting outperformed in benchmarks pretty much all of the time. But people tend to take performance benchmarks as an indicative as the whole platform and that's just missing the point. It's what you can do with the device with that performance that matters. If you're so simple minded to judge a device and a whole OS just by one of the many things that it can perform, well go ahead, keep on chasing that carrot.
For me, I don't really care about Office being on the Surface. What is awesome for me about the Surface is that I can consume content on this device almost as fast as on my desktop computer due to it's multitasking model, user interface, swipe gestures, and snap modes. What slows me down a bit compared to the desktop is no site-specific zoom levels, scrolling down long pages take longer compared to a scroll wheel, not being as fast at opening multiple tabs, and websites with a lot of small touch targets. Even with those, I don't find myself wanting the Desktop to consume content because I can bring my Surface almost everywhere and touch is still better for speed in general navigation and to navigate Metro.
Being able to consume content this fast on a device meant for touch is awesome. So how about you benchmark the speed of switching apps and multitasking in the Surface vs. other tablets? Would you judge a whole device by that then?
Edit: Oh yeah, another thing that really helps on content consumption is that I don't need to transfer content from my server or my other computers. All content I have is accessible through the network and I never have to think of how to transfer that content over to my tablet device. This is definitely not applicable to everyone, but this makes the Surface not another device I have to independently manage. It just needs to play mkv files though...
a secret-boss
Banned
finally get to try this out in my local MS store.
looks pretty neat. I tried to visit Giantbomb site to see some videos. didn't work. ARM flash not supported
looks pretty neat. I tried to visit Giantbomb site to see some videos. didn't work. ARM flash not supported
There is a giant bomb app tough kinda rough last time I checked. You can also edit the flash whitelist if you want.
Meh , performance will get better on the majority of apps. The ipad/iphones share hardware and an os largely since 2007 when the iphone launched. The developers have had a long time to get used to designing for the os and hardware. Even now we get a single phone / tablet a year from apple with this year 2 tablets coming out. The surface has been out 2 weeks. In time applications will be tweaked and modified for the hardware and os and we will see speed ups.
The one thing I don't see youtube video's showing off is how much faster the ipad is at running 2 apps side by side vs the surface running 2 apps side by side.
The one thing I don't see youtube video's showing off is how much faster the ipad is at running 2 apps side by side vs the surface running 2 apps side by side.
I would rather see the space used for full SD cards instead of two micro sd slots. SD cards are faster and higher capacity than micro sd cards. Right now you can get a nice 128 gig sd card with speeds of 90MB/s .
That type of performance is pretty typical although clearly people are only focusing on the first part of the video with the fish benchmarks thing. I don't agree with his statement about software not leading to improvements in the performance (first generation product!) but I had pretty much the same mindset as he did towards the end of the video, which you can find earlier in the thread
Returned the Surface, cautiously anticipating the Surface Pro... Although I really want a Win8 device to play with before January. WinRT will hopefully get better with time, but it's not worth the investment to me right now.
That type of performance is pretty typical although clearly people are only focusing on the first part of the video with the fish benchmarks thing. I don't agree with his statement about software not leading to improvements in the performance (first generation product!) but I had pretty much the same mindset as he did towards the end of the video, which you can find earlier in the thread
Returned the Surface, cautiously anticipating the Surface Pro... Although I really want a Win8 device to play with before January. WinRT will hopefully get better with time, but it's not worth the investment to me right now.
I agree, if RT was £300-£350 then I would have jumped no problem, I just think £400 is too high for what they're offering. I can't help but feel that the RT should have been somewhere between the Pro and RT model.
Have you guys seen this? Teardown shows the Surface RT more profitable than the iPad.
A Xbox 360 game only costs 50p to make too...
Xplatformer
Member
I agree. The Surface should have been priced at $399 and pitted against the iPad 2, not the iPad 3.
Feature to feature...the Surface looks very enticing at that price point.
Surface RT > iPad 2
Still...I've purchased Macintosh products over Windows based products in the past and over the life of the purchase I never felt that I overpaid for what I purchased. The devices did what I expected them to do, and they did them the way I wanted them done.
Surface RT is overpriced, but I'd rather use it than an iPad 4. I don't own a laptop.
Feature to feature...the Surface looks very enticing at that price point.
Surface RT > iPad 2
Still...I've purchased Macintosh products over Windows based products in the past and over the life of the purchase I never felt that I overpaid for what I purchased. The devices did what I expected them to do, and they did them the way I wanted them done.
Surface RT is overpriced, but I'd rather use it than an iPad 4. I don't own a laptop.
Souless_PJ
Banned
http://microsoft-news.com/microsoft-surface-sales-are-starting-modest-says-steve-ballmer/
So far Microsoft has not released any sales figures for the Microsoft Surface RT, but in Microsofts first comment on the performance of the device, Steve Ballmer has told le parisien that sales of the Microsoft Surface "are starting modestly."
Sounds like the market agrees
So far Microsoft has not released any sales figures for the Microsoft Surface RT, but in Microsofts first comment on the performance of the device, Steve Ballmer has told le parisien that sales of the Microsoft Surface "are starting modestly."
Sounds like the market agrees
brotkasten
Member
If sales are good, a company will brag about it. Microsoft didn't brag, therefore sales weren't that great.
If sales aren't great then I'm hoping that lights a fire under MS's ass.
I live in the UK and nobody knows about this device let alone that a pro model is due too.
I can't help but feel that Ballmer is at fault if this fails, the guy is an ass.
A lot of the reason sales are probably bad is because it's an MS store exclusive. iPads by comparison are everywhere. MS needs their devices to be out there for people to see and they aren't doing that. No one I know has heard of the Surface and I doubt any of them would want to buy one online since it's a new device. They'd probably want to fiddle around with one to see if they like it or not and see how well it works.
Yikes. Those numbers can't be too good.
Sad thing is though, I expect the Pro to sell even less.
Exactly, why only sell online or in your stores when you only have stores in the US?
I really do think surface will bomb and hopefully take a different approach the next time.
the design team went above and beyond on the surface. A damn shame to see sales of such a beautifully designed product cut off at the knees by the suits at MS.. APPLE is notorious for over pricing their products and this has an even higher profit margin? To compete with the iPad (250k apps) and Android($199) they needed to offer more value for the money.
Yes the problem with low sales at launch is, if you cut the price too early then it looks like you're desperate and if you wait then people cry that I'll get one when the inevitable price cut comes because of low sales. This will also put devs off because why commit to a platform that has low sales.
MS had one chance at this and that chance has passed, they should have launched RT and Pro at the same time with lower costs.
Still buying one though.
MS had one chance at this and that chance has passed, they should have launched RT and Pro at the same time with lower costs.
Still buying one though.
Numbers for production were 4m this quarter. I doubt they would have enough to put this device in many stores.
Hoping the device bombs will only stop ms from trying , not have them try and sell in more stores , esp since they already said they would expand throughout the year to more retailers.
Xplatformer
Member
I'm glad I still have a month to decide.
I want to hear a few opinions on the Surface after a full month of usage. After that time I'm going to see if getting one seems like a smart idea, or if saving money by buying an iPad mini makes more sense.
Look at this..
and then look at this
I have to question...would I be any more productive with the Surface for $500 than I would be with the mini for $330?
Yes...running office is nice...but I don't want to invest in a Zune 2.0 no matter how good I think the product is. I thought the Zune was a good media player, but it didn't last.
Have you actually tried using a 7 inch keyboard ?
You should get what you want though. If the ipad mini makes more sense to you then you should buy it. The surface rt wont end up like the zune. (even though the zune existed for a good 4 years and still received updates till windows 8 came out)
I'm going to wait for the surface pro. It will be better for productivity than either the mini or the rt
Xplatformer
Member
yn-neko hates a cat
Banned
Surface wasn't really meant to sell a lot. Right now it's limited to online and MS stores (of which there aren't many) and only to a handful of countries. They want to sell 3 to 5 million units and don't expect iPad levels.
Of course they also expect the Pro to sell less. It's a ~1000$ device. That's not a mainstream price point. There's absolutely nothing sad about that.
Just because one teardown has it at a lower BOM than the iPad doesn't mean they have higher margins. I very much doubt they make anywhere close to what Apple makes on an iPad.
Also one article from back when the Surface was announced said the Surface division had to "pay" the Windows division for the Windows license like any OEM. According to rumors that's 85$ for Windows RT.
I recommend reading this blog entry as well as the two entries in the footnote: http://ceklog.kindel.com/2012/10/21/revisiting-the-mullet-why-surface-is-not-a-ms-business/
Not sure what you mean here. So it's not enough if you think a product is great because you need everyone else to agree? The Zune may have been a failure when it comes to sales, but it was a pretty great product and the market place as well as the Zune pass still work. So I'm not sure what the problem is with owning a Zune.
What do you care if the Surface is as successful at competing with the iPad as the Zune was against the iPod? Windows is a way bigger deal than the Zune ever was. There'll be hundreds of millions of Windows 8 devices to strengthen the app ecosystem.
lunarworks
Member
Yup. The word "modestly" is a bad, bad sign. Companies will usually exaggerate how well something is selling.
Modestly isn't a bad sign. Remember they had a production run of 4-5m for this quarter. They aren't going to be able to post ipad or even nexus numbers. So any numbers they post will look bad even if they are actually good
Guys, what? By that same logic the Kindle devices must have sold badly as well.
BoM arguments are always silly. Why do you care so much about how much profit the company is making? What matters is the value proposition of the product to the potential customers. If the value is low compared to what the price is, then less people will buy it. Something like marketing typically increases the value proposition of a product significantly compared to a product without, that's why companies do marketing. Are you going to argue companies shouldn't do marketing because that would let them sell a device closer to the BoM price to satisfy the very few?
BoM arguments are always silly. Why do you care so much about how much profit the company is making? What matters is the value proposition of the product to the potential customers. If the value is low compared to what the price is, then less people will buy it. Something like marketing typically increases the value proposition of a product significantly compared to a product without, that's why companies do marketing. Are you going to argue companies shouldn't do marketing because that would let them sell a device closer to the BoM price to satisfy the very few?
plagiarize
Banned
Ctrl+V doesn't work?
Unknown Soldier
Member
It's pretty unlikely they'll sell 3-5 million units in this market, against this competition, at their price point. The Surface RT is hilariously overpriced for a tablet with such a low resolution screen. MS understood the concept of penetration pricing when they priced Windows 8 super-low for upgrades, they wanted to get Win8 out there and priced it more cheaply than any other version of Windows ever released. And yet they completely failed to understand it with the RT. Pricing as high as iPad is market suicide, as the Blackberry Playbook and HP Touchpad should have made abundantly clear. Google understands penetration pricing all too well, which is why the Nexus 7 is now selling a million units a month by some estimates and the Nexus 10 will start at $100 less than than the equivalent iPad but still has a Retina screen.
I would not be surprised if the Pro sold better than the RT, because that's what people who want a tablet running Windows actually want: a tablet which runs Windows! WinRT is not Windows 8 and can't run any desktop apps, despite the same UI. This is going to kill the RT pretty quick IMHO. The Pro on the other hand looks like a nice device which actually runs Photoshop and Firefox, which is pretty much what we all wanted to begin with.
Once again, what MS wanted and needed to accomplish with Win8 vs. the Surface were completely different, and the respective pricing only reflected that.
Tathanen
Get Inside Her!
Nope D:
Maybe there's a way to remap it, I'll have to look into it. It seems like a common UNIX problem though.
-pic.jpg)
Unknown Soldier
Member
I would say it's setting the bar in about the right place, now that Ballmer is downplaying RT sales as 'modest'.
There's no way in the world Surface RT will perform as badly as those two considering the circumstances those two devices were in.
Talking about the Playbook, hardly anyone gave a shit when they sold it for cheap, and probably still is now because the device wasn't worth much to anyone (hey BoM enthusiasts). Surface RT? You're looking at plenty of people wishing so much it was only $100 cheaper so that they could own one.
I agree 100%
They should have released one model with a 1080p screen and specs between the RT and Pro yet running windows 8 total.
Not a gimped RT system and then a Pro later. I pity anyone that bought a RT and didn't know that a Pro would be coming. MS fucked up and the surface release shows how much they don't understand the market. As much as I'll never go back to apple I really hope MS are not trying to beat them. Considering that they are now designing and making their won chips it's very easy to see where apple are going yet MS appear to be choking on apples dust.
Xplatformer
Member
Uhm...what would you consider to be the most popular desktop apps out there? Office? Excel specifically?
And if Photoshop Touch were to appear on the Microsoft Store, would you then think RT was ok? I mean, we all know Photoshop use to run fine on Pentium 3 processors. I'm sure it wouldn't be that bad on an ARM based unit.