| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |
| Surface for Windows RT just $199? |
| By Thom Holwerda on 2012-08-14 15:36:41 |
| "According to an inside source, a session was held at Microsoft's recent TechReady15 conference in which all the launch details were laid out. If things go according to the plan detailed then, the Surface for Windows RT tablet will be launching October 26th - no surprise there - at a compelling price of $199." My wallet just squealed in pure bliss. |
|
| RE: Just what I've always wanted |
| By BrianH on 2012-08-14 18:00:20 |
|
It sounds like it is exactly as locked down as the iPad; maybe more, maybe less, depending on the implementation. The real question is whether it is as limited as the iPad. The iPad is very limited by the App Store restrictions. How do the Microsoft Store restrictions compare? What will MS allow that Apple prohibits, and vice-versa? I haven't seen a comparison between the two yet. All that we can count on is it being more restrictive than Google Play, for better and worse. |
 - Score: 4 |
| Epic fail |
| By Windows Sucks on 2012-08-14 18:04:19 |
|
This will be Windows CE all over again. What's gonna happen is regular windows users are gonna run out and snap this up because of price and be pissed to high heaven when they realize they can't run any of their old windows software on it. I am sure the X86 versions of their tablets will be pricy as hell. |
| - Score: 1 |
| RE: Confusing terminology |
| By franksands on 2012-08-14 18:07:23 |
| MS always has been more verbose than Apple. I think we can just call them Surface RT and Surface Pro. |
| - Score: 1 |
| ... |
| By Hiev on 2012-08-14 18:16:37 |
| If that is thar price and the quality is aceptable then I'm buying this one. |
| - Score: 2 |
| If this is true... |
| By Novan_Leon on 2012-08-14 18:19:31 |
| If this is true, I wouldn't be at all surprised if we see Xbox-esque direct-to-desktop advertising sooner rather than later. This is the only way I can think that they're coming out ahead on this, unless they're pulling a Sony and hoping to make back in software what they lose in hardware. |
| - Score: 2 |
| Comment by Radio |
| By Radio on 2012-08-14 19:19:01 |
| 199$ ? That's not even covering the price of the magnesium... If they still intend to use it (I vaguely remember that they may backtrack on that, but I think it was in Digitimes - not a trustworthy source, usually, but now that I see this price...). |
| - Score: 1 |
| Comment by kurkosdr |
| By kurkosdr on 2012-08-14 19:29:47 |
|
Microsoft has to very carefull with the pricing of the Surface. Price it like the iPad, and it will fail like any other tablet priced like the iPad (Motorola Xoom, Transformer Prime, Playbook etc). Price at a loss, and other OEMs will steer away from WinRT, so the Surface will have to lift the entite WinRT sales. Price it at razor-thin margins, and it will probably be more expensive than the Nexus 7. My bet is on "razor thin margins". The Surface is Microsoft's way to tell OEMs "this is how you do it, and how much you should charge". Microsoft doesn't care about how much the Surface will sell, this is why they 'll sell it only at Microsoft Stores. The Surface was made because Microsoft didn't trust their OEMs will make a good product and price it right, so MS had to literally show them. And since MS would like their OEMs to sell their Win8 tablets at razor-thin margins, it's reasonable to assume the Surface will be sold at razor thin margins too. Edited 2012-08-14 19:36 UTC |
| - Score: 1 |
| RE: Comment by _cynic_ |
| By Bobthearch on 2012-08-14 19:32:53 |
|
Lenovo, Dell, and Samsung Windows RT tablets and laptops confirmed http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/1... |
| - Score: 3 |
| Dumb Move |
| By galvanash on 2012-08-14 19:39:41 |
|
I said it when they announced this thing... They should price it identically to the iPad if they they are serious about being a long term competitor. They are making the same mistake that everyone else makes when trying to compete with Apple... They should be trying to make a better product at the same price (so they can, you know, actually make some money on it). If they don't feel they have a better product yet they should go back and spend some money and improve it until they feel it is a better product. They won't get a second chance with this. I have to say that personally I think the product has potential. It has some very compelling and creative features and if they get some developer love they might be able to make a dent in the table market with it. But... Pricing it at $199? They just make it look like a cheap wannabe. Sure it will put the product in more hands faster (which definitely affects developer confidence positively), but as a developer that pricing does not give me any sense that they have confidence in it. It makes it feel like an experiment, i.e. "lets give it away and see if it sticks"... Why should I bother with that? Part of the reason that developers flock to Apple devices is that they are not cheap. Apple makes gobs of money - no one is seriously worried about the product being dropped any time soon. How long will Microsoft bankroll a product when they lose money on every sale? Will it ever be popular enough that they can actually increase the price (or decrease the costs) enough that the question of its continued existence goes away? Do I want to try and market my software to the "I really wanted an iPad, but this was cheaper" demographic??? On top of that, pricing it to make a profit on it would have at least given their OEMs a small sense of hope. They could at least have tried selling "cheap" Windows 8 tablets as an alternative to the pricy Microsoft product. Fighting over the leftovers is better than nothing at all... But at $199? Why bother even trying? They should come out at $499 and fight for the 2 or 3 years it will take to get some traction (and it will take that long either way). It is definitely a better product than any of their OEMs can make, so that isn't worth worrying about. Let Android guys fight over the crumbs in the market, Microsoft should focus solely on Apple - that is their only real competitor. They need to try and beat them at their own game for once. After they have a bit of traction they could take advantage of economies of scale and probably drop the price some. But it is stupid to come out the gate losing money on every sale - it won't work... Sorry, they are totally screwing up going this route out of the gate... |
| - Score: 1 |
| RE[2]: Just what I've always wanted |
| By Morgan on 2012-08-14 20:29:04 |
|
My experience with it on Windows Phone 7 is that it is somewhat more flexible than the Apple store, but not nearly as open-ended as the Play store where you can find apps like Superuser and Terminal that are tied to rooting. For one thing, browsing the Entertainment category on the Windows store means wading through dozens of overtly sex-oriented apps that would never make the cut on the Apple store. But that's just my subjective experience; I really have no idea what is officially allowed or not since I'm not a developer. I'll say too, that since I've been playing around with a Nexus S I've found the Play store to be much less intuitive than when it was the Android Market, and find it only slightly better than the Apple store as far as ease of use goes. That's one thing I think Microsoft got right: You can demo ANY paid app without having to download a separate trial app, and the demos tend to be more fully functional than their Android and iOS equivalents. Again, my personal experience and that of others may vary. |
| - Score: 2 |
| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |