4 ms·

I think Surface Pro is an excellent device for enterprise, much better than the iPad. Problem with Microsoft is always their marketing and branding. They're mak

I think Surface Pro is an excellent device for enterprise, much better than the iPad. Problem with Microsoft is always their marketing and branding. They're making a huge push for consumers when they should instead be doing enterprise and education.

baruch 13y ago
That would be rather hilarious given that they were always touted as better marketers than anyone else in the market. At least that was the blame in every community I was involved in (OS/2 & Linux).
smacktoward 13y ago
The problem there is that the IT department may love Surface, but if all the VPs insist on bringing their iPads into the office, IT is gonna have to support the iPad. Then it's a question of "do we support iPad and Surface, or just iPad?" Because "IT says so" isn't much of an argument when it regards telling someone with power in the corporate hierarchy they can't do what they want to do. In a way this mirrors the early days of the PC business, when people lugging their Apple IIs and Trash-80s into the office so they could run VisiCalc...
- Guvante 13y ago
  If we are talking enterprise, Microsoft is doing just fine. VPs will soon see that a Surface does most of what the iPad does, and everything their desktop does. Unless you can live without Office the Surface is a great device. The problem for Microsoft is the enterprise is where they currently dominate, so maintaining that market is nice, but doesn't do much for their problem of the mobile market as a whole.
rayiner 13y ago
The problem with Surface Pro isn't just marketing and branding. It's a poor point in the design space. It's as expensive as an ultrabook, but makes major compromises in screen size and keyboard quality in order to be able to pinch-hit as a tablet. Enterprise and education aren't the kind of forward-looking places where you want to be pushing a novel form-factor. What Microsoft should have done was release a single Surface product based on an x86 Atom processor at the $500 price point, along with accessories like a mobile dock. That would've been a product they might've gotten Enterprises to buy into. Of course, they're continuing the failed dichotomy to this day. The mantra behind Surface is "a tablet that can run your legacy apps!" but they still ignore the processor that's best-suited for hitting that design point: Bay Trail. You can run "real windows" in a tablet device that can retail for $400! They're leaving that whole market to HP, Dell, etc, who've proven over and over they don't have an innovative chromosome in their entire DNA.
- silverlake 13y ago
  I used to agree with you until I talked to people who own a Surface. IMHO Surface Pro's point in the design space is, in order, (1) a powerful Win8 tablet for most corporate work, (2) a good computer when docked to a big screen and keyboard, and (3) a small laptop when you need it (11" Air). That's actually a pretty good idea. I won't buy a Surface because (3) is the most important thing for me, so I require a 13"-14" laptop. Most HNers don't need (1) because they aren't in a MS IT environment. But for the bulk of non-tech Fortune 500 employees a Surface is pretty good, though expensive. The same goes for Win Phone. They could be the new Blackberry if they stop chasing consumers. They will always be behind on apps, but they can succeed by having corporate apps deeply integrated with MS IT infrastructure. Neither iOS nor Android can do that. Finally, MS is not known for getting things right in the first few releases. They ship crap and iterate towards adequate.

baruch 13y ago

That would be rather hilarious given that they were always touted as better marketers than anyone else in the market. At least that was the blame in every community I was involved in (OS/2 & Linux).

smacktoward 13y ago

The problem there is that the IT department may love Surface, but if all the VPs insist on bringing their iPads into the office, IT is gonna have to support the iPad. Then it's a question of "do we support iPad and Surface, or just iPad?" Because "IT says so" isn't much of an argument when it regards telling someone with power in the corporate hierarchy they can't do what they want to do. In a way this mirrors the early days of the PC business, when people lugging their Apple IIs and Trash-80s into the office so they could run VisiCalc...

Guvante 13y ago
If we are talking enterprise, Microsoft is doing just fine. VPs will soon see that a Surface does most of what the iPad does, and everything their desktop does. Unless you can live without Office the Surface is a great device. The problem for Microsoft is the enterprise is where they currently dominate, so maintaining that market is nice, but doesn't do much for their problem of the mobile market as a whole.

rayiner 13y ago

The problem with Surface Pro isn't just marketing and branding. It's a poor point in the design space. It's as expensive as an ultrabook, but makes major compromises in screen size and keyboard quality in order to be able to pinch-hit as a tablet. Enterprise and education aren't the kind of forward-looking places where you want to be pushing a novel form-factor. What Microsoft should have done was release a single Surface product based on an x86 Atom processor at the $500 price point, along with accessories like a mobile dock. That would've been a product they might've gotten Enterprises to buy into. Of course, they're continuing the failed dichotomy to this day. The mantra behind Surface is "a tablet that can run your legacy apps!" but they still ignore the processor that's best-suited for hitting that design point: Bay Trail. You can run "real windows" in a tablet device that can retail for $400! They're leaving that whole market to HP, Dell, etc, who've proven over and over they don't have an innovative chromosome in their entire DNA.

silverlake 13y ago
I used to agree with you until I talked to people who own a Surface. IMHO Surface Pro's point in the design space is, in order, (1) a powerful Win8 tablet for most corporate work, (2) a good computer when docked to a big screen and keyboard, and (3) a small laptop when you need it (11" Air). That's actually a pretty good idea. I won't buy a Surface because (3) is the most important thing for me, so I require a 13"-14" laptop. Most HNers don't need (1) because they aren't in a MS IT environment. But for the bulk of non-tech Fortune 500 employees a Surface is pretty good, though expensive. The same goes for Win Phone. They could be the new Blackberry if they stop chasing consumers. They will always be behind on apps, but they can succeed by having corporate apps deeply integrated with MS IT infrastructure. Neither iOS nor Android can do that. Finally, MS is not known for getting things right in the first few releases. They ship crap and iterate towards adequate.