Microsoft Announces "Surface" Tablet (1 Viewer)

[The Commish]

And really, I still think you're ignoring the fact that many of these solutions are more secure than the alternative. I'm guessing you're probably defining security very narrowly, and aren't considering aspects like availability and integrity, which are also important along with simply confidentiality. A cloud based solution that exposed all of your data to the internet could be preferable from a security perspective if confidentiality wasn't important and your main goal was simply availability. I think you've just thrown out general accusations and haven't really demonstrated what security issues you're most concerned about and the level of risk they really present.

Of course I have. Data transmission security is probably the highest order of concern with a set up like the one's I have mentioned. I said that pages ago. I've not made a single accusation though, so I'm not sure where that came from.

You've accused the solutions of having "faux security" "lax security" "no security" and all sorts of things. I didn't say personal accusation. This is going nowhere, I'm just going to bow out of the conversation.

Would you consider a data transmission non ssl and/or no cert required to be "secure"?

Which services transmit your information in clear text?

What does that have to do with my question? This is what I'm talking about. You just "answer" my questions with more questions.

 

[DrJ]

And really, I still think you're ignoring the fact that many of these solutions are more secure than the alternative. I'm guessing you're probably defining security very narrowly, and aren't considering aspects like availability and integrity, which are also important along with simply confidentiality. A cloud based solution that exposed all of your data to the internet could be preferable from a security perspective if confidentiality wasn't important and your main goal was simply availability. I think you've just thrown out general accusations and haven't really demonstrated what security issues you're most concerned about and the level of risk they really present.

Of course I have. Data transmission security is probably the highest order of concern with a set up like the one's I have mentioned. I said that pages ago. I've not made a single accusation though, so I'm not sure where that came from.

You've accused the solutions of having "faux security" "lax security" "no security" and all sorts of things. I didn't say personal accusation. This is going nowhere, I'm just going to bow out of the conversation.

Would you consider a data transmission non ssl and/or no cert required to be "secure"?

Which services transmit your information in clear text?

What does that have to do with my question? This is what I'm talking about. You just "answer" my questions with more questions.

I didn't need to answer the question as we went over this several pages ago. Of course the answer is no. So now tell me which services suffer from the problems you're describing.

 

[mattdaddy]

Watched the keynote finally and came away with a really good feeling about what they are doing with this product in the bigger picture of the Windows world. The device itself comes across as very useful and cool. More importantly with the launch of Windows 8 a developer can potentially write one app that would be avaliable for sale on 4 different platforms including Windows Phone, Windows 8 Metro for PC or Surface, and XBox. There are at least 40 million Xbox users, maybe 10 million phone, and 100s of million Windows 7 users currently and 100s of million Windows users not on 7. If all this carries forward to Windows 8 then any one App can potentially be sold to a much larger audience then Apple can provide now or even in the near future. It's resonable to think that the number could be a 1/2 billion users worldwide in the relatively short future. This market won't be ignored and an explosion of Apps is sure to happen.

It is promising but I think they need to make Windows 8 on the desktop able to run without the Metro UI to avoid losing marketshare.

Download the Windows 8 preview. You can switch back and forth between Classic (looks like Windows 7) and Metro fairly easily. It will take some time to get it onto as many desktops as 7 but when the dam breaks the holdouts on 7 will probably be converting alongside the current 7 users and there will just be a huge influx of users. That might even be Windows 9 for all I know but it seems inevitable with the way they are going.

I'll check it out but from what I've read it sounds like there are many instances where you are forced into using Metro and prevented from organizing the windows on your screen.We're just upgrading from XP to Windows 7 my office. The tech guys are still hesitant to put my desktop on 7 because they are really worried about compatibility issues with all our proprietary software.

I've only played around with it on a virtual machine but it does kind of force you into the Metro UI at times. They still have work to do if they want to strike a healthy balance between the 2. Conceptually, I get what they are trying to do and it is a paradigm shift so users will be hesitant to convert. The conversion is more like going from wWindows 3.1 to Windows 95 then going from XP to Windows 7. One could argue that the paradigm shift to a developer is as big as going from DOS to Windows. They are moving from an event driven mostly synchronous model to a completely asynchronous model. One good thing about it is no more locked up screens for the user but that comes at a price of being harder to develop for when you have been use to the synchronous (waiting on the hourglass) world.

 

[Slapdash]

Watched the keynote finally and came away with a really good feeling about what they are doing with this product in the bigger picture of the Windows world. The device itself comes across as very useful and cool. More importantly with the launch of Windows 8 a developer can potentially write one app that would be avaliable for sale on 4 different platforms including Windows Phone, Windows 8 Metro for PC or Surface, and XBox. There are at least 40 million Xbox users, maybe 10 million phone, and 100s of million Windows 7 users currently and 100s of million Windows users not on 7. If all this carries forward to Windows 8 then any one App can potentially be sold to a much larger audience then Apple can provide now or even in the near future. It's resonable to think that the number could be a 1/2 billion users worldwide in the relatively short future. This market won't be ignored and an explosion of Apps is sure to happen.

It is promising but I think they need to make Windows 8 on the desktop able to run without the Metro UI to avoid losing marketshare.

Download the Windows 8 preview. You can switch back and forth between Classic (looks like Windows 7) and Metro fairly easily. It will take some time to get it onto as many desktops as 7 but when the dam breaks the holdouts on 7 will probably be converting alongside the current 7 users and there will just be a huge influx of users. That might even be Windows 9 for all I know but it seems inevitable with the way they are going.

I'll check it out but from what I've read it sounds like there are many instances where you are forced into using Metro and prevented from organizing the windows on your screen.We're just upgrading from XP to Windows 7 my office. The tech guys are still hesitant to put my desktop on 7 because they are really worried about compatibility issues with all our proprietary software.

I've only played around with it on a virtual machine but it does kind of force you into the Metro UI at times. They still have work to do if they want to strike a healthy balance between the 2. Conceptually, I get what they are trying to do and it is a paradigm shift so users will be hesitant to convert. The conversion is more like going from wWindows 3.1 to Windows 95 then going from XP to Windows 7. One could argue that the paradigm shift to a developer is as big as going from DOS to Windows. They are moving from an event driven mostly synchronous model to a completely asynchronous model. One good thing about it is no more locked up screens for the user but that comes at a price of being harder to develop for when you have been use to the synchronous (waiting on the hourglass) world.

Yeah, that is exactly the type of thing I am afraid of. I think having a full toggle option would be great so you don't have to deal with the Metro UI for power uses. I'd wager they will be getting plenty of feedback from business users and design the next iteration with a better balance. This seems like the cycle they have been doing for the last decade with ever other OS release being adapted by enterprise. It seems pretty promising for most uses though. I think Windows is going in the right direction after a while of standing still. Getting this on the Xbox would be a big win; the Xbox UI is very painful right now.

 

[The Commish]

And really, I still think you're ignoring the fact that many of these solutions are more secure than the alternative. I'm guessing you're probably defining security very narrowly, and aren't considering aspects like availability and integrity, which are also important along with simply confidentiality. A cloud based solution that exposed all of your data to the internet could be preferable from a security perspective if confidentiality wasn't important and your main goal was simply availability. I think you've just thrown out general accusations and haven't really demonstrated what security issues you're most concerned about and the level of risk they really present.

Of course I have. Data transmission security is probably the highest order of concern with a set up like the one's I have mentioned. I said that pages ago. I've not made a single accusation though, so I'm not sure where that came from.

You've accused the solutions of having "faux security" "lax security" "no security" and all sorts of things. I didn't say personal accusation. This is going nowhere, I'm just going to bow out of the conversation.

Would you consider a data transmission non ssl and/or no cert required to be "secure"?

Which services transmit your information in clear text?

What does that have to do with my question? This is what I'm talking about. You just "answer" my questions with more questions.

I didn't need to answer the question as we went over this several pages ago. Of course the answer is no. So now tell me which services suffer from the problems you're describing.

barracuda is one. It's not that they don't have it but they leave it to the user to implement it if they so choose. The ssl architecture for apple and google are suspect at best. They have "something" in place, but it's really in name only. Google's a bit better in that they can provide a browser cert, but it's not been rolled out yet. Apple won't go that way, they rely on the OS and will continue to do so.

 

[SacramentoBob]

Watched the keynote finally and came away with a really good feeling about what they are doing with this product in the bigger picture of the Windows world. The device itself comes across as very useful and cool. More importantly with the launch of Windows 8 a developer can potentially write one app that would be avaliable for sale on 4 different platforms including Windows Phone, Windows 8 Metro for PC or Surface, and XBox. There are at least 40 million Xbox users, maybe 10 million phone, and 100s of million Windows 7 users currently and 100s of million Windows users not on 7. If all this carries forward to Windows 8 then any one App can potentially be sold to a much larger audience then Apple can provide now or even in the near future. It's resonable to think that the number could be a 1/2 billion users worldwide in the relatively short future. This market won't be ignored and an explosion of Apps is sure to happen.

It is promising but I think they need to make Windows 8 on the desktop able to run without the Metro UI to avoid losing marketshare.

Download the Windows 8 preview. You can switch back and forth between Classic (looks like Windows 7) and Metro fairly easily. It will take some time to get it onto as many desktops as 7 but when the dam breaks the holdouts on 7 will probably be converting alongside the current 7 users and there will just be a huge influx of users. That might even be Windows 9 for all I know but it seems inevitable with the way they are going.

Last I saw, Microsoft was working to disable this.http://www.theverge.com/2012/5/31/3054348/microsoft-windows-8-start-button-legacy-code-removal?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+WinRumors+%28WinRumors%29

Despite a growing debate over Metro on desktop PCs, Microsoft doesn't appear to be willing to offer a choice of traditional desktop or Metro with its upcoming Windows 8 release, opting to continue to fuse the pair together. Thurrott claims there will not be an option to boot directly into the desktop for business or power users, and that Windows Server 12 will also boot into Metro.

 

[SacramentoBob]

I don't think I want a tablet experience on my servers.

 

[DrJ]

I don't think I want a tablet experience on my servers.

 

[Slapdash]

Watched the keynote finally and came away with a really good feeling about what they are doing with this product in the bigger picture of the Windows world. The device itself comes across as very useful and cool. More importantly with the launch of Windows 8 a developer can potentially write one app that would be avaliable for sale on 4 different platforms including Windows Phone, Windows 8 Metro for PC or Surface, and XBox. There are at least 40 million Xbox users, maybe 10 million phone, and 100s of million Windows 7 users currently and 100s of million Windows users not on 7. If all this carries forward to Windows 8 then any one App can potentially be sold to a much larger audience then Apple can provide now or even in the near future. It's resonable to think that the number could be a 1/2 billion users worldwide in the relatively short future. This market won't be ignored and an explosion of Apps is sure to happen.

It is promising but I think they need to make Windows 8 on the desktop able to run without the Metro UI to avoid losing marketshare.

Download the Windows 8 preview. You can switch back and forth between Classic (looks like Windows 7) and Metro fairly easily. It will take some time to get it onto as many desktops as 7 but when the dam breaks the holdouts on 7 will probably be converting alongside the current 7 users and there will just be a huge influx of users. That might even be Windows 9 for all I know but it seems inevitable with the way they are going.

Last I saw, Microsoft was working to disable this.http://www.theverge.com/2012/5/31/3054348/microsoft-windows-8-start-button-legacy-code-removal?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+WinRumors+%28WinRumors%29

Despite a growing debate over Metro on desktop PCs, Microsoft doesn't appear to be willing to offer a choice of traditional desktop or Metro with its upcoming Windows 8 release, opting to continue to fuse the pair together. Thurrott claims there will not be an option to boot directly into the desktop for business or power users, and that Windows Server 12 will also boot into Metro.

MSFT better be careful here. If they chase after Apple too hard they risk driving these users to Linux.

 

[SacramentoBob]

I don't think I want a tablet experience on my servers.

I'm already at the point now when I sometimes think my laptop has a touch screen. After touching the screen 3-4 times I finally remember I can't actually do it that way.

 

[mattdaddy]

Watched the keynote finally and came away with a really good feeling about what they are doing with this product in the bigger picture of the Windows world. The device itself comes across as very useful and cool. More importantly with the launch of Windows 8 a developer can potentially write one app that would be avaliable for sale on 4 different platforms including Windows Phone, Windows 8 Metro for PC or Surface, and XBox. There are at least 40 million Xbox users, maybe 10 million phone, and 100s of million Windows 7 users currently and 100s of million Windows users not on 7. If all this carries forward to Windows 8 then any one App can potentially be sold to a much larger audience then Apple can provide now or even in the near future. It's resonable to think that the number could be a 1/2 billion users worldwide in the relatively short future. This market won't be ignored and an explosion of Apps is sure to happen.

It is promising but I think they need to make Windows 8 on the desktop able to run without the Metro UI to avoid losing marketshare.

Download the Windows 8 preview. You can switch back and forth between Classic (looks like Windows 7) and Metro fairly easily. It will take some time to get it onto as many desktops as 7 but when the dam breaks the holdouts on 7 will probably be converting alongside the current 7 users and there will just be a huge influx of users. That might even be Windows 9 for all I know but it seems inevitable with the way they are going.

Last I saw, Microsoft was working to disable this.http://www.theverge.com/2012/5/31/3054348/microsoft-windows-8-start-button-legacy-code-removal?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+WinRumors+%28WinRumors%29

Despite a growing debate over Metro on desktop PCs, Microsoft doesn't appear to be willing to offer a choice of traditional desktop or Metro with its upcoming Windows 8 release, opting to continue to fuse the pair together. Thurrott claims there will not be an option to boot directly into the desktop for business or power users, and that Windows Server 12 will also boot into Metro.

They are trying to kill off the start menu as you know it now to replace it with the apps menu but they support Win32 style applications which will run in an environment that is basically Windows 7. Control Panel is in app on the metro UI but it runs in the Windows 7 environment in the preview version, so is word pad and paint. Essentially all Win32 style apps run as one App in the Windows 7 environment but you can switch back from there by going to the "Start" menu which is just the Metro UI main screen with all your apps on it. On that screen there are some Metro based apps other Windows 7 based apps. You don't know the difference until you click on them and see what happens. Obviously this is a transition phase for Microsoft who probably sees everything moving to Metro style but knows it will take a long time for this to happen and may never fully happen. It's like when you run a dos program from within windows and it pops up in a shell window.

 

[DrJ]

And really, I still think you're ignoring the fact that many of these solutions are more secure than the alternative. I'm guessing you're probably defining security very narrowly, and aren't considering aspects like availability and integrity, which are also important along with simply confidentiality. A cloud based solution that exposed all of your data to the internet could be preferable from a security perspective if confidentiality wasn't important and your main goal was simply availability. I think you've just thrown out general accusations and haven't really demonstrated what security issues you're most concerned about and the level of risk they really present.

Of course I have. Data transmission security is probably the highest order of concern with a set up like the one's I have mentioned. I said that pages ago. I've not made a single accusation though, so I'm not sure where that came from.

You've accused the solutions of having "faux security" "lax security" "no security" and all sorts of things. I didn't say personal accusation. This is going nowhere, I'm just going to bow out of the conversation.

Would you consider a data transmission non ssl and/or no cert required to be "secure"?

Which services transmit your information in clear text?

What does that have to do with my question? This is what I'm talking about. You just "answer" my questions with more questions.

I didn't need to answer the question as we went over this several pages ago. Of course the answer is no. So now tell me which services suffer from the problems you're describing.

barracuda is one. It's not that they don't have it but they leave it to the user to implement it if they so choose. The ssl architecture for apple and google are suspect at best. They have "something" in place, but it's really in name only. Google's a bit better in that they can provide a browser cert, but it's not been rolled out yet. Apple won't go that way, they rely on the OS and will continue to do so.

Happen to have any good information on what makes apple and google's SSL architectures so suspect? I'm interested, not trying to attack or anything.As a whole, I don't think that calling out a company's SSL architecture as suspect is going to resonate with the end user though. Where they mostly care about security is at a higher level. When an article comes out that says iCloud has been hacked and all of their information on it could be potentially exposed, it could be irreparably harmful to Apple's reputation. They'd put out a fix and claim everything is OK, but they're going to lose a lot of money over it. We've learned from Microsoft's examples that a poor reputation in this area can be a difficult thing to shake even after you've made improvements and the problems they've had in the past have certainly cost them some amount of market share and money. This is probably what gives companies the most motivation to devote resources to this stuff. They're under constant pressure to deliver on functionality as quickly as possible, and that's certainly their #1 goal. But there is still some motivation to deliver on security, because security flaws do have some impact on their reputation as well.

 

[The Commish]

And really, I still think you're ignoring the fact that many of these solutions are more secure than the alternative. I'm guessing you're probably defining security very narrowly, and aren't considering aspects like availability and integrity, which are also important along with simply confidentiality. A cloud based solution that exposed all of your data to the internet could be preferable from a security perspective if confidentiality wasn't important and your main goal was simply availability. I think you've just thrown out general accusations and haven't really demonstrated what security issues you're most concerned about and the level of risk they really present.

Of course I have. Data transmission security is probably the highest order of concern with a set up like the one's I have mentioned. I said that pages ago. I've not made a single accusation though, so I'm not sure where that came from.

You've accused the solutions of having "faux security" "lax security" "no security" and all sorts of things. I didn't say personal accusation. This is going nowhere, I'm just going to bow out of the conversation.

Would you consider a data transmission non ssl and/or no cert required to be "secure"?

Which services transmit your information in clear text?

What does that have to do with my question? This is what I'm talking about. You just "answer" my questions with more questions.

I didn't need to answer the question as we went over this several pages ago. Of course the answer is no. So now tell me which services suffer from the problems you're describing.

barracuda is one. It's not that they don't have it but they leave it to the user to implement it if they so choose. The ssl architecture for apple and google are suspect at best. They have "something" in place, but it's really in name only. Google's a bit better in that they can provide a browser cert, but it's not been rolled out yet. Apple won't go that way, they rely on the OS and will continue to do so.

Happen to have any good information on what makes apple and google's SSL architectures so suspect? I'm interested, not trying to attack or anything.As a whole, I don't think that calling out a company's SSL architecture as suspect is going to resonate with the end user though. Where they mostly care about security is at a higher level. When an article comes out that says iCloud has been hacked and all of their information on it could be potentially exposed, it could be irreparably harmful to Apple's reputation. They'd put out a fix and claim everything is OK, but they're going to lose a lot of money over it. We've learned from Microsoft's examples that a poor reputation in this area can be a difficult thing to shake even after you've made improvements and the problems they've had in the past have certainly cost them some amount of market share and money. This is probably what gives companies the most motivation to devote resources to this stuff. They're under constant pressure to deliver on functionality as quickly as possible, and that's certainly their #1 goal. But there is still some motivation to deliver on security, because security flaws do have some impact on their reputation as well.

They took their presentations with them when they left. And FWIW....I'm not trying to convince the end user of anything, though I am completely comfortable thinking if they saw what I saw, they'd be thinking about what they put in "the cloud". Apple's teflon with their security issues. How many times does Safari have to show up on the "most vulnerable" and "easiest to hack" lists before any of their base pays attention?

 

[DrJ]

And really, I still think you're ignoring the fact that many of these solutions are more secure than the alternative. I'm guessing you're probably defining security very narrowly, and aren't considering aspects like availability and integrity, which are also important along with simply confidentiality. A cloud based solution that exposed all of your data to the internet could be preferable from a security perspective if confidentiality wasn't important and your main goal was simply availability. I think you've just thrown out general accusations and haven't really demonstrated what security issues you're most concerned about and the level of risk they really present.

Of course I have. Data transmission security is probably the highest order of concern with a set up like the one's I have mentioned. I said that pages ago. I've not made a single accusation though, so I'm not sure where that came from.

You've accused the solutions of having "faux security" "lax security" "no security" and all sorts of things. I didn't say personal accusation. This is going nowhere, I'm just going to bow out of the conversation.

Would you consider a data transmission non ssl and/or no cert required to be "secure"?

Which services transmit your information in clear text?

What does that have to do with my question? This is what I'm talking about. You just "answer" my questions with more questions.

I didn't need to answer the question as we went over this several pages ago. Of course the answer is no. So now tell me which services suffer from the problems you're describing.

barracuda is one. It's not that they don't have it but they leave it to the user to implement it if they so choose. The ssl architecture for apple and google are suspect at best. They have "something" in place, but it's really in name only. Google's a bit better in that they can provide a browser cert, but it's not been rolled out yet. Apple won't go that way, they rely on the OS and will continue to do so.

Happen to have any good information on what makes apple and google's SSL architectures so suspect? I'm interested, not trying to attack or anything.As a whole, I don't think that calling out a company's SSL architecture as suspect is going to resonate with the end user though. Where they mostly care about security is at a higher level. When an article comes out that says iCloud has been hacked and all of their information on it could be potentially exposed, it could be irreparably harmful to Apple's reputation. They'd put out a fix and claim everything is OK, but they're going to lose a lot of money over it. We've learned from Microsoft's examples that a poor reputation in this area can be a difficult thing to shake even after you've made improvements and the problems they've had in the past have certainly cost them some amount of market share and money. This is probably what gives companies the most motivation to devote resources to this stuff. They're under constant pressure to deliver on functionality as quickly as possible, and that's certainly their #1 goal. But there is still some motivation to deliver on security, because security flaws do have some impact on their reputation as well.

They took their presentations with them when they left. And FWIW....I'm not trying to convince the end user of anything, though I am completely comfortable thinking if they saw what I saw, they'd be thinking about what they put in "the cloud". Apple's teflon with their security issues. How many times does Safari have to show up on the "most vulnerable" and "easiest to hack" lists before any of their base pays attention?

Looks like they cut down on the number of security vulnerabilities in Safari pretty significantly. As a whole it seems that the number of vulnerabilities is trending downwards across systems as a whole. Even Microsoft has shortened it's gigantic lead in # of HIGH vulnerabilities. That's mostly due to their apps though - almost every one of their OSes did worse than the year before. http://www.gfi.com/blog/the-most-vulnerable-operating-systems-and-applications-in-2011/

 

[RedmondLonghorn]

Not really relevant to anything, but the GM of the Surface group was my son's little league coach a couple years ago. Great guy. And he can coach: has won three straight league/city championships.

 

[17seconds]

Not really relevant to anything, but the GM of the Surface group was my son's little league coach a couple years ago. Great guy. And he can coach: has won three straight league/city championships.

You see the guy Mike Angiulo who was in the surface presentations? One of my best friends from ages 8-11. He and I used to goof around hacking Commodore 64s at that age.

 

[Mario Kart]

Any updates as to the pricing other than $300 - $800? Interested in possibly getting one for school use.

 

[cstu]

Any updates as to the pricing other than $300 - $800? Interested in possibly getting one for school use.

I haven't heard anything else, but if the Surface Pro is $800 I'm in.

 

[Mario Kart]

Any updates as to the pricing other than $300 - $800? Interested in possibly getting one for school use.

I haven't heard anything else, but if the Surface Pro is $800 I'm in.

Seems a high price point with no 3G/4G. Guess WiFi is better anyway so maybe that is their justification. I'm hoping it is not over $400 for the entry one.

 

[Fennis]

Any updates as to the pricing other than $300 - $800? Interested in possibly getting one for school use.

I haven't heard anything else, but if the Surface Pro is $800 I'm in.

Seems a high price point with no 3G/4G. Guess WiFi is better anyway so maybe that is their justification. I'm hoping it is not over $400 for the entry one.

$300

 

[cstu]

Any updates as to the pricing other than $300 - $800? Interested in possibly getting one for school use.

I haven't heard anything else, but if the Surface Pro is $800 I'm in.

Seems a high price point with no 3G/4G. Guess WiFi is better anyway so maybe that is their justification. I'm hoping it is not over $400 for the entry one.

$300

$300 is good for the basic Surface RT. At that price and with the built-in keyboard it will be a viable alternative to the iPad. I'm not interested since I already have a Transformer Prime and want something that Windows programs if I'm going to switch. My ideal purchase would be the Dell XPS Duo but I'm expecting sticker shock on that one.

 

[Mario Kart]

Not much info on these things. $300 seems to be the price for the RT version. Wonder what the basic model with Windows 8 will be. Since, I have read, these things will have a USB port of some kind, I wonder if that information will be easily accessible using the tablet OS. Just curious to know more.

 

[cstu]

Not much info on these things. $300 seems to be the price for the RT version. Wonder what the basic model with Windows 8 will be. Since, I have read, these things will have a USB port of some kind, I wonder if that information will be easily accessible using the tablet OS. Just curious to know more.

It will have a full size USB 2.0 slot, a MicroSD card slot and HDMI.

 

[No. 16]

Not much info on these things. $300 seems to be the price for the RT version. Wonder what the basic model with Windows 8 will be. Since, I have read, these things will have a USB port of some kind, I wonder if that information will be easily accessible using the tablet OS. Just curious to know more.

It will have a full size USB 2.0 slot, a MicroSD card slot and HDMI.

Entry vs Pro

 

[cstu]

Not much info on these things. $300 seems to be the price for the RT version. Wonder what the basic model with Windows 8 will be. Since, I have read, these things will have a USB port of some kind, I wonder if that information will be easily accessible using the tablet OS. Just curious to know more.

It will have a full size USB 2.0 slot, a MicroSD card slot and HDMI.

Entry vs Pro

The RT has Micro HD Video - am I wrong to assume this is micro-HDMI?The Pro will have Mini DisplayPort Video but that seems unnecessary considering people would rarely want to output a resolution higher than 1080. Seems to be more of a hassle buying a Mini DP to HDMI cable rather than using an HDMI cable people already have.

 

[Buddy Ball 2K3]

Not much info on these things. $300 seems to be the price for the RT version. Wonder what the basic model with Windows 8 will be. Since, I have read, these things will have a USB port of some kind, I wonder if that information will be easily accessible using the tablet OS. Just curious to know more.

It will have a full size USB 2.0 slot, a MicroSD card slot and HDMI.

Entry vs Pro

The RT has Micro HD Video - am I wrong to assume this is micro-HDMI?The Pro will have Mini DisplayPort Video but that seems unnecessary considering people would rarely want to output a resolution higher than 1080. Seems to be more of a hassle buying a Mini DP to HDMI cable rather than using an HDMI cable people already have.

So other than gig size and battery what is the justification for a $500 difference?

 

[Mario Kart]

Not much info on these things. $300 seems to be the price for the RT version. Wonder what the basic model with Windows 8 will be. Since, I have read, these things will have a USB port of some kind, I wonder if that information will be easily accessible using the tablet OS. Just curious to know more.

It will have a full size USB 2.0 slot, a MicroSD card slot and HDMI.

Entry vs Pro

The RT has Micro HD Video - am I wrong to assume this is micro-HDMI?The Pro will have Mini DisplayPort Video but that seems unnecessary considering people would rarely want to output a resolution higher than 1080. Seems to be more of a hassle buying a Mini DP to HDMI cable rather than using an HDMI cable people already have.

So other than gig size and battery what is the justification for a $500 difference?

The OS. According to that chart it looks to me to have MS Office loaded on there. Am I correct or no?

 

[Cliff Clavin]

Not much info on these things. $300 seems to be the price for the RT version. Wonder what the basic model with Windows 8 will be. Since, I have read, these things will have a USB port of some kind, I wonder if that information will be easily accessible using the tablet OS. Just curious to know more.

It will have a full size USB 2.0 slot, a MicroSD card slot and HDMI.

Entry vs Pro

The RT has Micro HD Video - am I wrong to assume this is micro-HDMI?The Pro will have Mini DisplayPort Video but that seems unnecessary considering people would rarely want to output a resolution higher than 1080. Seems to be more of a hassle buying a Mini DP to HDMI cable rather than using an HDMI cable people already have.

So other than gig size and battery what is the justification for a $500 difference?

The OS. According to that chart it looks to me to have MS Office loaded on there. Am I correct or no?

Chart has Office on the RT, not the pro.

 

[Buddy Ball 2K3]

Not much info on these things. $300 seems to be the price for the RT version. Wonder what the basic model with Windows 8 will be. Since, I have read, these things will have a USB port of some kind, I wonder if that information will be easily accessible using the tablet OS. Just curious to know more.

It will have a full size USB 2.0 slot, a MicroSD card slot and HDMI.

Entry vs Pro

The RT has Micro HD Video - am I wrong to assume this is micro-HDMI?The Pro will have Mini DisplayPort Video but that seems unnecessary considering people would rarely want to output a resolution higher than 1080. Seems to be more of a hassle buying a Mini DP to HDMI cable rather than using an HDMI cable people already have.

So other than gig size and battery what is the justification for a $500 difference?

The OS. According to that chart it looks to me to have MS Office loaded on there. Am I correct or no?

Chart has Office on the RT, not the pro.

So if I have my corporate copy of MS Office 2007 can I use it on the cheaper version?

 

[Mario Kart]

The video I saw, not of the surface but of the RT OS, showed the screen could go from app mode to a desktop type mode. Unlike the iPad which is app based only. It looked nice and different. Not sure if I need windows 8 to work with the stuff at school but can't wait to have that setup going... if I even can.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

What apps are available for this?

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

Not much info on these things. $300 seems to be the price for the RT version. Wonder what the basic model with Windows 8 will be. Since, I have read, these things will have a USB port of some kind, I wonder if that information will be easily accessible using the tablet OS. Just curious to know more.

It will have a full size USB 2.0 slot, a MicroSD card slot and HDMI.

Entry vs Pro

The RT has Micro HD Video - am I wrong to assume this is micro-HDMI?The Pro will have Mini DisplayPort Video but that seems unnecessary considering people would rarely want to output a resolution higher than 1080. Seems to be more of a hassle buying a Mini DP to HDMI cable rather than using an HDMI cable people already have.

Do we even know what the output resolution specs are? It would be ######ed to shutout users with 30" monitors since HDMI cannot drive that resolution.

 

[cstu]

Not much info on these things. $300 seems to be the price for the RT version. Wonder what the basic model with Windows 8 will be. Since, I have read, these things will have a USB port of some kind, I wonder if that information will be easily accessible using the tablet OS. Just curious to know more.

It will have a full size USB 2.0 slot, a MicroSD card slot and HDMI.

Entry vs Pro

The RT has Micro HD Video - am I wrong to assume this is micro-HDMI?The Pro will have Mini DisplayPort Video but that seems unnecessary considering people would rarely want to output a resolution higher than 1080. Seems to be more of a hassle buying a Mini DP to HDMI cable rather than using an HDMI cable people already have.

Do we even know what the output resolution specs are? It would be ######ed to shutout users with 30" monitors since HDMI cannot drive that resolution.

The screen on the RT is 720p but I'm assuming it will be able to output 1080p. The Pro has a 1080p and should be able to output higher resolution.

 

[cstu]

Bad news for us hoping for a $299 Surface RT:

Well, file this in the don't believe anything you read on the Internet department. Contrary to relentless rumors that Microsoft Surface would start at $199, actual cost will be $300 more. Rather than price against tablets selling for $299 or less, Surface competes with iPad, while offering more storage for less cost. But iPad has the way upper hand on screen resolution, which is a compelling feature.

At Noon EDT today, Microsoft started taking pre-orders for Surface, following a gaffe that temporarily offered the tablet and revealed pricing -- $499 to $699 for three models. The entry-level 32GB tablet is $499, same as new iPad, which is 16GB. The $599 Surface adds detachable keyboard cover, and the $699 model bumps storage to 64GB. Pre-orders are for the model running Windows RT. Microsoft hasn't announced pricing or started pre-orders for the Windows 8 tablet. As previously reported, Surface RT launches alongside Windows 8 on October 26. Yesterday, Microsoft kicked off the tablet's ad blitz.

Four months ago, I asserted that "Surface is all about Apple", and final pricing bears that out. At a time when Android tablet prices creep down -- ASUS Pads, Google Nexus 7 and Samsung Galaxy tablets are all examples -- Surface stays closer to iPad. From a purely screen-resolution perspective, iPad 2 costs less, just $399 (but, again, only with 16GB storage). Like comparably-priced Surface, the $599 new iPad also has 32GB storage and the $699 model 64GB, but no free, detachable keyboard. But Apple's tablet offers considerably higher screen resolution for the price -- 2048 by 1536, compared to 1366 by 768 for Surface. Additionally, Apple offers iPads with LTE. Surface is Wi-Fi only, but does run Windows and comes with Office Home and Student for free.

Sorry, but at that price I'm not interested.

 

[Slapdash]

Way to blow it, M$FT.

 

[cstu]

Way to blow it, M$FT.

 

[Slapdash]

I guess I may as well just stick with the iPad2 instead of selling it then.

 

[SacramentoBob]

Sorry, but at that price I'm not interested.

Same here. Mrs. SB might be, but I dunno.

 

[HellToupee]

geez that cool keyboard cover is $120???

 

[[icon]]

Zune 2.0

 

[Rayderr]

Zune 2.0

The Zune HD rocks and IMO is better than anything than Apple or any other mp3 maker has put out (grantsd, there is a surprisngly lack of 64gb mp3 players)

 

[[icon]]

Zune 2.0

The Zune HD rocks and IMO is better than anything than Apple or any other mp3 maker has put out (grantsd, there is a surprisngly lack of 64gb mp3 players)

Pretty sure your opinion is in the minority GB.

 

[Rayderr]

Zune 2.0

The Zune HD rocks and IMO is better than anything than Apple or any other mp3 maker has put out (grantsd, there is a surprisngly lack of 64gb mp3 players)

Pretty sure your opinion is in the minority GB.

I think you'd be surprised if you actually asked people who used both.

 

[Slapdash]

Zune 2.0

The Zune HD rocks and IMO is better than anything than Apple or any other mp3 maker has put out (grantsd, there is a surprisngly lack of 64gb mp3 players)

Pretty sure your opinion is in the minority GB.

I think you'd be surprised if you actually asked people who used both.

I'm always amazed by how much people love their Zunes

 

[Rayderr]

Zune 2.0

The Zune HD rocks and IMO is better than anything than Apple or any other mp3 maker has put out (grantsd, there is a surprisngly lack of 64gb mp3 players)

Pretty sure your opinion is in the minority GB.

I think you'd be surprised if you actually asked people who used both.

I'm always amazed by how much people love their Zunes

the first version was lacking compared to the iPods that were out there. The HDs were a huge leap forward. Sadly, it couldn't overcome the negative perceptions caused by the first versions.

 

[cstu]

Zune 2.0

The Zune HD rocks and IMO is better than anything than Apple or any other mp3 maker has put out (grantsd, there is a surprisngly lack of 64gb mp3 players)

Pretty sure your opinion is in the minority GB.

I think you'd be surprised if you actually asked people who used both.

I'm always amazed by how much people love their Zunes

I would rather have bought Zune over my iPod Touch but the car I bought already had an iPod hookup and that's almost entirely where I use it. The iPod has a ton of apps but I never use them so it's a waste for me. iTunes is absolute garbage, I can't believe you Apple supporters put up with it.

 

[cstu]

The worst part about the pricing is that it makes it unlikely the Surface Pro will be $800. Looks like I'll have to seriously consider the Dell XPS 12.

 

[Hawks64]

Zune 2.0

The Zune HD rocks and IMO is better than anything than Apple or any other mp3 maker has put out (grantsd, there is a surprisngly lack of 64gb mp3 players)

Pretty sure your opinion is in the minority GB.

I think you'd be surprised if you actually asked people who used both.

I'm always amazed by how much people love their Zunes

Zune as a device was ok, but what sold me was the Zune pass, which for 15/mth I have access to any an all music with DRM and I get 10 non DRM downloads per mth. That service lives on and won't change since they have now ported it over to Xbox. Wish Apple would have done something like that.

 

[Hawks64]

Way to blow it, M$FT.

Wasted opportunity, no way this takes market share from Apple even if it comes with Office.

 

[Dexter]

Zune 2.0

The Zune HD rocks and IMO is better than anything than Apple or any other mp3 maker has put out (grantsd, there is a surprisngly lack of 64gb mp3 players)

Pretty sure your opinion is in the minority GB.

I think you'd be surprised if you actually asked people who used both.

I'm always amazed by how much people love their Zunes

Zune as a device was ok, but what sold me was the Zune pass, which for 15/mth I have access to any an all music with DRM and I get 10 non DRM downloads per mth. That service lives on and won't change since they have now ported it over to Xbox. Wish Apple would have done something like that.

Yes the Zune is a great device. Not only did it do everything an iPod could but it also had a radio and wireless sharing among other features. What it didn't have was a cool marketing campaign to back it up.All that is OBE now. My phone does everything now so there's no need for another device other than my small MP3 player I use for runnign.