Surface with Windows 8 Pro – Pricing

Everyone seems really blown away by the pricing and I'm not sure why. This isn't an iPad, it houses a fully functional operating system that lets you run existing Windows 7 desktop applications.<p>In a use-case scenario I see it being more similar to a laptop than to the iPad. If I can run Visual Studio on it and it handles all my existing Windows 7 applications correctly, I'd consider purchasing it. I don't look at it like it's a tablet I'm going to be installing a Scrabble App on, though.

I don't get the general perspective that the concept of what the Surface Pro is trying to be is a pointless/undesirable thing.<p>Now, I totally understand the Surface Pro and Windows 8 might not be a _good_ solution to a problem... but there is a problem. And that problem is that I have too many devices. I have a tablet. I have a laptop. And I have a desktop. They all serve their function well, but I do imagine that in the future all of these devices will be combined into one. I believe that's inevitable. The Surface Pro is trying to be this solution (again, whether it's a successful solution is TBD). A device with no keyboard when I want a tablet. Attach a keyboard when you need it for whatever reason when you're on the go. Throw it in a dock when you're at your desktop to get your main work done, with multiple monitors, a comfy desk and chair, etc.<p>To scoff at this idea as not being a valid problem to tackle, and suggest the Surface Pro has no reason to even exist, seems short-sighted to me.

With an active digitizer and the ability to run full apps, this looks like the perfect photography/graphic work portable workstation, that you can then dock at your desk at home. Extremely interested in it for that alone.<p>But I might wait a round or two, or look for similar 3rd party convertible things... At $1000, currently, it would need to be something that could do everything I wanted when traveling, and I'm skeptical that the in-lap keyboard experience on one of these will be good enough to make it a true laptop replacement for me. Typing in an airport, for instance (or just a recliner, or bed, or wherever)... I want it to be able to sit in my lap.<p>A cheaper Surface Pro in the future will appeal just for the portable photography workstation aspect. A laptop-based 3rd-party alternative with as good a digitizer, at about the same price, would appeal as my next laptop. Not sure this version 1 hits what I want, though.

I'm think that Microsoft erred severely in making a Surface RT in addition to a Surface Pro.<p>Surface RT is too little. Why pay as much as an iPad and more than a Nexus 10 for a device with a last-generation screen and last-generation processor?<p>Surface Pro is too much. There is a segment of people who would want to run full-fleged desktop apps on a touch-screen tablet, but I'm convinced that the number of those people is vanishingly small. The apparent usefulness of being able to run classic desktop apps decreases when you realize that the apps that won't work with Windows RT are by definition the ones that haven't been updated to be usable on a touch screen. Moreover, with the touch cover requiring a flat surface to use the keyboard, the whole "laptop replacement" angle goes out the window in a lot of situations where a 10.6" laptop would be very desirable (e.g. train commutes).<p>It was a mistake from the beginning to have two lines. They should have focused on making one compelling product, instead of two severely compromised ones. Why are goodies like the 1080p screen bundled inextricably with the battery-destroying Ivy Bridge processor? Office is the key differentiator here, the "Windows ecosystem" is secondary. Surface should have been one device with a Clover Trail processor, 1080p screen, Office, and 8+ hours battery life. If Google can deliver the Nexus 10 at $400, Microsoft should have been able to deliver such a device at $600.<p>Unfortunately, all of the OEM's are copying Microsoft's RT/Pro dichotomy. The Windows RT devices have low-resolution screens and last-generation processors, while the Windows Pro devices have battery-sucking Ivy Bridge processors. It's a distinction that maybe made sense to some marketing geek, but one that's totally non-sensical as a practical matter.

Should be interesting. One of the things I've wished for was a tablet that could do both capacitive touch style interactions and more precise Wacom pen/tablet style interactions. Looks like I'll have a chance to play with an implementation of that.<p>I agree with kimura that its a pretty high price point. Although reserve judgement on whether or not it crosses into the 'too expensive' territory. Its essentially the same machine as a Macbook Air which is $1,199 for a 128G model (vs the Surface Pro 128GB @ $999)

Classic Microsoft rear-guard move to protect margins for Intel and their hardware chain (and consequently trying to prop up their desktop OS appeal as well) by trying to "tablet-ify" their existing offerings. Expect a bunch of Surface clones (MS approved) to hit the market soon afterwards.<p>This strategy won't work. Many folks who would buy a Win8 Pro surface are likely going to just buy an ultrabook or netbook + iPad/Nexus/Fire instead.<p>Microsoft shouldn't even be competing against Apple. They should be deathly afraid of Android. Apple doesn't want to turn iOS into a desktop-like experience, however a Asus Transformer did Surface before Microsoft did.

So it's basically as expensive as a MacBook Air, but not as polished or light-weight, and it comes with Windows 8? I'm still stuck on why I need something in between a tablet and a small laptop, especially when it costs as much as a nicer ultrabook.

If that price included a full version of Office I would definitely get it myself.<p>As priced, it's a no-brainer for the executive set who like to be seen with their iPads but get real work done on 5 pound, AD-joined, IT provisioned Dells. They already have volume licensed Office, and IT teams are going to make this a standard option for road-warriors and execs.<p>I think the Hacker News set doesn't understand what it's like to work at a non-tech Fortune 500 company. Microsoft's goal isn't to replace the iPad on teenagers' Christmas lists, it's to protect the highly lucrative corporate market from further iPad (and eventually Mac) penetration. On that measure, the Surface Pro is going to crush it.

It's competing with laptops, not tablets. If the price didn't kill it vs. tablets, the thickness and fans would. Terrible choice against the iPad, but potentially the right one vs. a MacBook Air.

Before even clicking the link, I thought to myself, 'What would I pay for a Windows 8 tablet?' Not more than $500 I thought. When I saw they priced it at $900 I laughed. Microsoft is a non-stop train wreck of misery at the moment. It's like Window ME and Windows Vista combined. I hope they come out of this beating with a renewed sense of reality. Maybe shed a few layers of management..

<i>In January, Surface with Windows 8 Pro will be available in two versions and pricing will start at $899.</i><p>Ouch.

Compared to a similar ultrabook its not that expensive, the problem is that for the average joe on a store its a $999 tablet surrounded by $200-500 tablets.<p>Maybe MSFT should have released a surface hybrid laptop-tablet instead. The kickstand+cover combo is great compared to other tablets but is not the same than a proper laptop keyboard.

Does anyone know how much RAM this thing has, since marketing speak has now taken "memory" to mean "storage space".<p>What's funny is calling this a laptop since your lap is about the only place you can't use it (apart from as a tablet I suppose). It's really a portable desktop.

I could see this being an excellent on-the-go digital sculpting/modeling machine. If the digitizer is comparable to a Wacom, this would be great for zbrush.

Specifications-wise (<a href="http://www.microsoft.com/Surface/en-US/surface-with-windows-8-pro/specifications" rel="nofollow">http://www.microsoft.com/Surface/en-US/surface-with-windows-...</a>) it's actually very similar to base models of the MacBook Air (perhaps actually smaller than the Air without the keyboard cover). At about $100 cheaper.

I think they priced themselves out of the market.

Man this thing is cool, I want it just for the digitizer and the resolution.

You can have 50% of an Ultrabook for 100% of the price. Total savings of up to negative 50%! How could anyone resist?<p>Only Apple can list 'Status Symbol' as one of the perks of their products, and I have a feeling that's one of the main features the average consumer wants in a tablet. Aside from the toy/gimmick factor and browsing the internet easily from bed (or the toilet), I'm just not seeing the mass appeal of these.

Definitely too expensive. I could have sworn that they claimed to keep the price under $800. Looks like I'll be waiting for either the inevitable price drop or fire sale for what would amount to a 2nd laptop for me. Knowing this, I don't understand why the ultrabooks are priced so exorbitantly despite them being "luxury" devices if they plan for people to actually buy them.

The marketplace isn't going to understand that this is more of a computer than an iPad. They need to hammer on "this runs Office".

As someone who likes to use Ableton Live and Adobe CS. This is exciting. I want to carry around a computer in the form of a tablet. I want to have pen input and USB.<p>I am using Surface RT right now. Its not perfect. But all the things, I dislike are hopefully fixed with the pro.<p>I do wish Apple made something similar.

Hey, cool! I had one of these back in 2003 when it was called a Tablet PC. Maybe they'll get it right this time.

Has anyone done disk benchmarks on the built-in NAND of either the RT or Pro? I've really gotten used to the performance difference between modern SATA SSDs and spinning disks, I'd hate to buy a surface and get performance of the bad old days.

Are these still "64gb" as in it's really 45gb with the OS files and such installed?

&#62; Surface with Windows 8 Pro will come with Intel’s next generation Core i5 processor<p>So it's going to run Haswell?! Weren't those supposed to come out only a quarter after that?

How much space will it take for OS+Office+other default applications? If the situation is same as Surface RT then 64 GB Surface Pro is definitely not a good choice.

Wonder how long it might take for them to release an updated model, considering the Intel Haswell microarchitecture should be available around Q2 2013.

After trying Windows 8, I'm not convinced "hybrids" are the future anymore. Everything about such a hybrid will be a compromise one way or the other.<p>You won't get the best desktop experience as Windows 8 is annoying you with Metro, and you always have to bypass it, a 10" screen is pretty useless for any real work on a PC (too small). You'll also get about half or less the battery life of an ARM tablet (and probably several times less for idle time - an ARM tablet can last for days on a charge with light use). You also get too little storage for a desktop PC and for the price.<p>It will get hot, and will get noise from the fans. It's 30% heavier than a 10" tablet, and people are already saying how the new iPad Mini will be the "real" iPad in the future because of its weight (half the weight of regular iPad) and size. And it's also too expensive for a tablet, if that's what you really want.<p>Manufacturers are already saying they expect touchscreen hybrids to only be a small part of the ultrabook sales next year, and I think they got it right. Hybrids will only be a niche market, and not the "future" of tablet and PC's that Microsoft hopes it will be.

Does anyone know how much free space is left on the 64GB model? WinRT takes up ~14GB on the 32GB non-pro Surface iirc.

maybe it'll be good as a backup laptop.<p>i just bought an X1 Carbon that needs to be sent back for repair.. i have done away with my desktop years ago so now i need a backup whilst my X1 is in repair.. the Surface Pro seems to fit this pretty well...

Half-nailed it.

Too expensive

Do we know how thickness will compare to the RT? From the photos, this looks kind of thick.