4 ms·

I agree, this is unusual for Anandtech. It seems you could summarise the 12 page review as 'meh'. Maybe they didn't have enough time with it to get into any mor

by mamp 14y ago

I agree, this is unusual for Anandtech. It seems you could summarise the 12 page review as 'meh'. Maybe they didn't have enough time with it to get into any more detailed analysis. Also, I get the impression that Microsoft has been set a lower bar -- almost encouraged for just having a go in this space rather than comparing it to existing products. E.g. how does the Type Cover compare to the range of 3rd party products available for the iPad for < $129? How much better is the Touch Cover to onscreen when taking into account predictive text & auto correct? Not much to go on in this review. Maybe MS haven't given a lot of time for people to spend with the product.

barista 14y ago
>> Maybe MS haven't given a lot of time for people to spend with the product. I remember to have read that he was playing with the device for almost 3 weeks. That's seems long enough.
rossjudson 14y ago
Any separate typing surface is superior to a touch screen surface. Touch screen keypads cover massive parts of the screen, force constant hand shifts, and constantly reposition content on the screen. Auto-correct and predictive corrections try to cover for problems that shouldn't exist. I fail to see how the review can be characterized as "meh". It comes off as guardedly impressed to me, and definitely looking forward to the next revision of the hardware. Hmm. Just saw a Surface commercial on TV while I was writing this. Looks like the war is a "go". Beneficiaries: Everyone.
- contextfree 14y ago
  Besides, auto-correct and predictive text can work with physical keyboards too.
  - ygra 14y ago
    They're just not that needed there. Or maybe that needs getting used to and it must never get in the way of normal typing. Although, now that I think of it, Word has auto-corrected common typos for ages now and in more recent versions it never caught something it shouldn't have (unlike Word 97).

by mamp 14y ago

barista 14y ago

>> Maybe MS haven't given a lot of time for people to spend with the product. I remember to have read that he was playing with the device for almost 3 weeks. That's seems long enough.

rossjudson 14y ago

Any separate typing surface is superior to a touch screen surface. Touch screen keypads cover massive parts of the screen, force constant hand shifts, and constantly reposition content on the screen. Auto-correct and predictive corrections try to cover for problems that shouldn't exist. I fail to see how the review can be characterized as "meh". It comes off as guardedly impressed to me, and definitely looking forward to the next revision of the hardware. Hmm. Just saw a Surface commercial on TV while I was writing this. Looks like the war is a "go". Beneficiaries: Everyone.

contextfree 14y ago
Besides, auto-correct and predictive text can work with physical keyboards too.
- ygra 14y ago
  They're just not that needed there. Or maybe that needs getting used to and it must never get in the way of normal typing. Although, now that I think of it, Word has auto-corrected common typos for ages now and in more recent versions it never caught something it shouldn't have (unlike Word 97).