5 ms·

Not sure it'd be sufficient, but the entry-level model is considerably cheaper. $350 for a Surface, $500 for an iPad.

• cclogg 13y ago
  But then you have the iPad Mini too...
• rgbrenner 13y ago
  Isn't the $350 figure after the recent price cut?
• anigbrowl 13y ago
  They should have launched Surface as it sown OS instead of trying to be Windows. I actually want an Intel Windows tablet because there's a bunch of audio software I'd use that will never be available on the iPad and it would be great to have a touch interface for my-obscure-applications. but Windows RT was the worst of both worlds - since it doesn't do anything in particular, I might as well just buy an iPad (if I want groovy, albeit somewhat limited, apps) or a Kindle Fire (if I just want to surf the web and consume content).
  • rbanffy 13y ago
    Microsoft is relevant because of Windows. Windows is relevant because of its market share. Fragmenting the market, for them, is suicide.
    • anigbrowl 13y ago
      You could have said the same thing about MacOS before they launched iOS.
• deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
• honestcoyote 13y ago
  That might help now, though I suspect it won't help much, but at release, and for a long time afterwards, the Surface was $599.
• shinratdr 13y ago
  As of a couple days ago, and you're choosing to ignore the true entry level device in the iPad line, the iPad mini which can't match on specs but does beat it on price, portability and form factor. I can't think of a single person I've talked to about purchasing a tablet that considers specs except for myself so that's hardly the motivator some would make it out to be.
  • seanmcdirmid 13y ago
    High resolution screen on the iPad 3 was great. That was one important spec.