Microsoft Surface RT Pricing
-
Pricing is announced! http://techcrunch.com/2012/10/16/microsoft-surface-rt-priced-32gb-for-499-without-touch-cover-599-with-64gb-for-699/[^] Wonder what the intel version will run. I have been expecting it to be no more than $1200 for the high end version.
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
Got my pre-order done. 64GB model for me and 32GB (with cyan touch cover) for my wife. Seriously psyched up for their arrival next week.
-
OK, so Microsoft is announcing the price to be the same as an iPad. In other words, they're not competing on price. They're going to compete on...what? Style? Hard to beat Apple at its own game. Productivity? They're charging an extra $120 (!) for the keyboard. What is the elevator pitch for this thing? How are they expecting to compete with Apple's stylish devices and Google's and Amazon's cheap devices?
My Messianic Jewish blog: Kineti L'Tziyon My software blog: Debugger.Break() Judah Himango
Um, I believe they're coming in under the iPad with the same storage amount. 16GB iPad is $499, 32GB iPad is $599, and 64GB iPad is $699. The 32GB Surface RT (without the touch cover) is only $499, same as the 16GB iPad. You only wind up with price "parity" when you get to the models that come with the touch cover. But at that point you'd need to add a detachable keyboard to the iPad to determine a comparable purchase price, so the Surface RT would still win on price.
-
Pricing is announced! http://techcrunch.com/2012/10/16/microsoft-surface-rt-priced-32gb-for-499-without-touch-cover-599-with-64gb-for-699/[^] Wonder what the intel version will run. I have been expecting it to be no more than $1200 for the high end version.
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
Collin Jasnoch wrote:
I have been expecting it to be no more than $1200 for the high end version
No that is the price for the Aussie version, everyone gouges the Australian market :mad:
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
-
Collin Jasnoch wrote:
I have been expecting it to be no more than $1200 for the high end version
No that is the price for the Aussie version, everyone gouges the Australian market :mad:
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
Well, here on brazil it will be at least $2000 (and i'm speaking of dollars.) Our taxes are extremelly high :sigh: Don't even get me started with the prices we will pay in the windows store...
I'm brazilian and english (well, human languages in general) aren't my best skill, so, sorry by my english. (if you want we can speak in C# or VB.Net =p)
-
Pricing is announced! http://techcrunch.com/2012/10/16/microsoft-surface-rt-priced-32gb-for-499-without-touch-cover-599-with-64gb-for-699/[^] Wonder what the intel version will run. I have been expecting it to be no more than $1200 for the high end version.
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
Seems pricey. Definitely not priced for consumer market penetration. The keyboard cover looks like it will break (just beyond the warranty) Samsung or Kindle will probably be the winners this Christmas for consumers.
-
OK, so Microsoft is announcing the price to be the same as an iPad. In other words, they're not competing on price. They're going to compete on...what? Style? Hard to beat Apple at its own game. Productivity? They're charging an extra $120 (!) for the keyboard. What is the elevator pitch for this thing? How are they expecting to compete with Apple's stylish devices and Google's and Amazon's cheap devices?
My Messianic Jewish blog: Kineti L'Tziyon My software blog: Debugger.Break() Judah Himango
They _could_ compete on style for several groups of people. Many reviewers say when _using_ metro/modern and multitasking with it, iOS feels like the stone age. It's very fluid. As for hardware style, people generally agree that it looks very good. The cover and its available colors are also very cool. Apples cover is also cool, but it, of course, lacks keybaord/touchpad. As for productivity, yes. Why? Office is included! Pen input! OneNote! Spec comparison: Surface has: microSD-slot, USB-port, 2GB RAM, stereo speakers, 10.6" screen, 1366x768 res, 720p front and rear facing cameras, no GPS, no 3G/4G, hardware keyboard/touchpad new iPad has: no microSD, no USB-port, 1GB RAM, mono speakers, 9.7" screen, 2048x1536 res, 1080p (5mp) rear camera and VGA front camera, GPS, 3G/4G, no hardware keyboard/touchpad Microsoft wins with SD-slot, USB, 1GB more RAM, stereo, bigger screen, 720p front facing camera and the touch cover Apple wins with higher resolution, better rear camera (I think), GPS and 4G 2GB ram means more tabs open while being able to open huge files in office. Huge win. Huge win for Apple with GPS and 4G. Software outtakes: Surface has a desktop, desktop IE, desktop office, file explorer - all optimized for touch. Huge win. IE is better and faster than current Safari. iPad doesn't have file system access unless you jailbreak, and thus no desktop for file exploring either.
-
Seems pricey. Definitely not priced for consumer market penetration. The keyboard cover looks like it will break (just beyond the warranty) Samsung or Kindle will probably be the winners this Christmas for consumers.
I would agree with you on all points. I really don't think MS is trying to "win" the market though. I thinks it more they do not want to dismiss the market and lose all hope of gaining any part of it.
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
-
They _could_ compete on style for several groups of people. Many reviewers say when _using_ metro/modern and multitasking with it, iOS feels like the stone age. It's very fluid. As for hardware style, people generally agree that it looks very good. The cover and its available colors are also very cool. Apples cover is also cool, but it, of course, lacks keybaord/touchpad. As for productivity, yes. Why? Office is included! Pen input! OneNote! Spec comparison: Surface has: microSD-slot, USB-port, 2GB RAM, stereo speakers, 10.6" screen, 1366x768 res, 720p front and rear facing cameras, no GPS, no 3G/4G, hardware keyboard/touchpad new iPad has: no microSD, no USB-port, 1GB RAM, mono speakers, 9.7" screen, 2048x1536 res, 1080p (5mp) rear camera and VGA front camera, GPS, 3G/4G, no hardware keyboard/touchpad Microsoft wins with SD-slot, USB, 1GB more RAM, stereo, bigger screen, 720p front facing camera and the touch cover Apple wins with higher resolution, better rear camera (I think), GPS and 4G 2GB ram means more tabs open while being able to open huge files in office. Huge win. Huge win for Apple with GPS and 4G. Software outtakes: Surface has a desktop, desktop IE, desktop office, file explorer - all optimized for touch. Huge win. IE is better and faster than current Safari. iPad doesn't have file system access unless you jailbreak, and thus no desktop for file exploring either.
Interesting. I'm opened to the possibility I'm wrong here. I'm...skeptical MS can beat Apple when it comes to design and sexiness. Apple's been doing that for decades. MS just got into the game. So it will be tough. I do like the USB port for expansion on Surface; really hate the closed hardware of iPad. Seems to close a lot of possibilities.
Apple wins with higher resolution, better rear camera (I think), GPS and 4G
Ouch, so MS isn't competing on the Retina displays, eh? That's a shame. GPS and 4G are huge, too.
My Messianic Jewish blog: Kineti L'Tziyon My software blog: Debugger.Break() Judah Himango
-
Interesting. I'm opened to the possibility I'm wrong here. I'm...skeptical MS can beat Apple when it comes to design and sexiness. Apple's been doing that for decades. MS just got into the game. So it will be tough. I do like the USB port for expansion on Surface; really hate the closed hardware of iPad. Seems to close a lot of possibilities.
Apple wins with higher resolution, better rear camera (I think), GPS and 4G
Ouch, so MS isn't competing on the Retina displays, eh? That's a shame. GPS and 4G are huge, too.
My Messianic Jewish blog: Kineti L'Tziyon My software blog: Debugger.Break() Judah Himango
Ouch indeed. They should've at least speced the display higher. Huge win for Apple ;) MS has (seemingly) commented on why they chose that resolution though: http://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft-explains-why-they-chose-1366768-resolution-for-the-surface-rt[^] Bottom line: because they wanted it to work well in lit conditions (lower reflective rate). While this may be a good reason.. techy people will not see it that way when comparing.
-
Pricing is announced! http://techcrunch.com/2012/10/16/microsoft-surface-rt-priced-32gb-for-499-without-touch-cover-599-with-64gb-for-699/[^] Wonder what the intel version will run. I have been expecting it to be no more than $1200 for the high end version.
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
I would say that most likely it's going to be no more than $1400. Unfortunately there is no local store for my country, and they don't ship outside the US in the US store, i guess i need to wait for it to appear on Amazon or in my local Office Depot. :(
CEO at: - Rafaga Systems - Para Facturas - Modern Components for the moment...
-
Ouch indeed. They should've at least speced the display higher. Huge win for Apple ;) MS has (seemingly) commented on why they chose that resolution though: http://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft-explains-why-they-chose-1366768-resolution-for-the-surface-rt[^] Bottom line: because they wanted it to work well in lit conditions (lower reflective rate). While this may be a good reason.. techy people will not see it that way when comparing.
Absolutely not. The Apple "Retina" propaganda is BS. And there "pixel-perfect" approach is an antiquated nightmare. They double the denisty of their display and suddenly applications quadruple in size and you use 4x as much bandwidth to download the high resolution pictures. OK, maybe it's only 3x with compression, but is it really worth waiting 3x as long for a website to display and paying more for the next tier data plan, just so you can get "beautiful" images and graphics. 99% of the time the "low" resolution version would be just fine, thank you. The Microsoft clear-type font rendering algorithms are far far superior to what Apple uses. The vector based graphics are easier on memory and bandwidth. So if you want to read / edit information that is text and diagrams, you want the Microsoft display. If you want to look at pretty pictures, and don't care how long it takes or how much it costs to download them -- then by all means, go with the Apple.
-
OK, so Microsoft is announcing the price to be the same as an iPad. In other words, they're not competing on price. They're going to compete on...what? Style? Hard to beat Apple at its own game. Productivity? They're charging an extra $120 (!) for the keyboard. What is the elevator pitch for this thing? How are they expecting to compete with Apple's stylish devices and Google's and Amazon's cheap devices?
My Messianic Jewish blog: Kineti L'Tziyon My software blog: Debugger.Break() Judah Himango
Judah, The screen res looks pretty awful compared to Apple's Retina. I won't be an early adopter.
"I do not have to forgive my enemies, I have had them all shot." — Ramón Maria Narváez (1800-68). "I don't need to shoot my enemies, I don't have any." - Me (2012).
-
Absolutely not. The Apple "Retina" propaganda is BS. And there "pixel-perfect" approach is an antiquated nightmare. They double the denisty of their display and suddenly applications quadruple in size and you use 4x as much bandwidth to download the high resolution pictures. OK, maybe it's only 3x with compression, but is it really worth waiting 3x as long for a website to display and paying more for the next tier data plan, just so you can get "beautiful" images and graphics. 99% of the time the "low" resolution version would be just fine, thank you. The Microsoft clear-type font rendering algorithms are far far superior to what Apple uses. The vector based graphics are easier on memory and bandwidth. So if you want to read / edit information that is text and diagrams, you want the Microsoft display. If you want to look at pretty pictures, and don't care how long it takes or how much it costs to download them -- then by all means, go with the Apple.
Actually, the guy who invented MS ClearType, Bill Hill, says that the Apple Retina display is a big advancement in digital displays. In The New iPad: 50 Year Science Fiction Becomes Reality[^], Hill writes,
I won't go on about the screen again. Anyone who's seen it and used it knows it's superb. 264ppi is enough to set the standard for the next 10-20 years. Hard to believe Apple manufactured this device for the price, and still makes great margins on it. One reviewer hit the nail on the head the other day. He said that Apple has made the iPad so easy to use, with so little interface clutter, that it's just a sheet of glass which becomes your portal to the world.
My Messianic Jewish blog: Kineti L'Tziyon My software blog: Debugger.Break() Judah Himango
-
I would think so. They fall right in line for some nice competition. I also would expect various incentives (MS is known for that tactic). For example, "By now and get $$$ for the store" or "By now and get $$$ back" etc etc. By doing so they can prop up their sales to drive further sales "See, people like the Surface and people like Windows 8". It tends to work in the long run for them at a short term cost. They would only do this though if initial sales are under what they expect. I really hope the sales do well. The market needs another player IMO.
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
I'll get one when 1) it becomes yesterday's technology (i.e. around this time next year) 2) when it is half the price (i.e. around this time next year) 3) when there are lots of experts about to tell me how to fix niggly problems That strategy worked for W2K, WXP, Vist, W7 and Android.