The Surface line is intended as a flagship device to show off Windows' strengths as an OS from the makers themselves. It fulfills the same purpose as Pixel for

The Surface line is intended as a flagship device to show off Windows' strengths as an OS from the makers themselves. It fulfills the same purpose as Pixel for Android, and, y'know, all of Apple's lineup. It's not intended to sell well solely to generate profit -- it's intended to sell well so that a higher proportion of in-the-wild machines running Windows will be ones with thoughtful design, not bottom-barrel $500 laptops with a crappy 1388x768 panel and a slow spinner drive. While it's not helpful to ban those from the Windows market (and concede to Chrome OS in the process), it's an effort to re-frame Windows' role from a "default" OS to an aspirational OS, shipped on aspirational devices. The design transition you speak of isn't happening because the OEMs and Microsoft's interests are no longer exactly aligned. The AndroidChromeOS reality has graduated from vague vaporware to an actual force, and many OEMs already reuse the same hardware for two different laptops: one Chrome OS, one Windows. As a more capable Chrome OS that can now run Android Apps -- yes, we can argue ad nauseum about its limitations, but with everything being a website or coming from an App Store, more and more people simply don't care -- creeps further upmarket, Microsoft's investment in the Surface line becomes a competitive advantage that they can try to leverage.