Are you seriously still calling out a computing device for not being repairable in 2018? That's the norm now, and has been since Apple decided everything should be surface mounted a few years back. It's just a necessary evil if you want a light, portable computer.

illrigger:

Are you seriously still calling out a computing device for not being repairable in 2018? That's the norm now, and has been since Apple decided everything should be surface mounted a few years back. It's just a necessary evil if you want a light, portable computer.

Not true. There are plenty of repairable ultrabooks/tablets out there. Apple just does dumb $hit like soldering the RAM to the motherboard to save a few pennies on connectors.

illrigger:

Are you seriously still calling out a computing device for not being repairable in 2018? That's the norm now, and has been since Apple decided everything should be surface mounted a few years back. It's just a necessary evil if you want a light, portable computer.

It is unfortunate, but frankly, it's becoming less necessary to need to open up your own devices. Computers are becoming more and more SoC-ish. People practically never upgrade RAM anymore; usually they buy it once and never think about it again. With cloud or network storage being so prevalent, people don't need as much local storage anymore. In order to make devices thinner, everything has to be soldered to the motherboard. Devices have become thin and compact enough that pretty much the only physical damage you cause makes the entire device junk, regardless of whether you actually have the opportunity to repair it. Hardware efficiency has reached a point where many devices can run fanless, and for the most part, don't degrade so easily from heat. Batteries live long enough that by the time it doesn't hold enough of a charge, your device is obsolete.

illrigger:

Are you seriously still calling out a computing device for not being repairable in 2018? That's the norm now, and has been since Apple decided everything should be surface mounted a few years back. It's just a necessary evil if you want a light, portable computer.

It deserves to be called out. I'm a SP4 owner and I hate the fact that everything's glued and soldered. Microsoft basically copied the worst features from the iPad/MacBook and they seriously need to reconsider this (especially now that the whole tablet craze has died down).

After all the horror stories I'd never consider buying a Surface, even when it was something I initially was greedily eyeing due to the good specs. Although the price was never attractive. I couldn't care less about Apple's products, and I laugh at anyone who considers them an industry standard setter.

If it were this price a couple years ago, I'd have bought it when I bought my last laptop. Meanwhile, I have plenty of tablets, old large phones and whatnot. Perhaps I'll watch the used market as these price drops help bottom out the older units too.

It has always been the high price that has led to the Surface sub par sells and lets not even mention their despicable app store

maikai:

It has always been the high price that has led to the Surface sub par sells and lets not even mention their despicable app store

Subpar sales? https://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-surface-hits-1bn-revenue-mission-accomplished/ https://www.engadget.com/2018/04/26/microsoft-q3-earnings/

illrigger:

Are you seriously still calling out a computing device for not being repairable in 2018? That's the norm now, and has been since Apple decided everything should be surface mounted a few years back. It's just a necessary evil if you want a light, portable computer.

It is not a norm. It happens, but moment you consider it normal, you are ready for next step. Then you call that next step normal, and again. You should think about things you consider normal. As they become new starting point. Want lightweight device? What about doing it by having less wasteful PCB and more things integrated in CPU/APU? 2x M.2 instead of single SSD/HDD. OLED/microLED screen which does not need backlight. And so on. There are so many ways how to make device lighter and slimmer. Nothing forces manufacturer to glue everything together.

Microsoft and its strange resolutions, why not add 120px to proper 1920x1200..

yasamoka:

Subpar sales? https://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-surface-hits-1bn-revenue-mission-accomplished/ https://www.engadget.com/2018/04/26/microsoft-q3-earnings/

Yes subpar sales. Both articles you linked to were simply related to the money made off of selling them which in the first article stated they had only just started profiting off of it. The very first article you linked to states they sold 1million units compared to Apples 215million units... Also they stated it still cost more to market them then they profited off of them. So your articles linking to profits have nada to do with how many they are selling, especially when compared to the competition.

maikai:

Yes subpar sales. Both articles you linked to were simply related to the money made off of selling them which in the first article stated they had only just started profiting off of it. The very first article you linked to states they sold 1million units compared to Apples 215million units... Also they stated it still cost more to market them then they profited off of them. So your articles linking to profits have nada to do with how many they are selling, especially when compared to the competition.

Subpar sales = under expectations / did not make a profit. They passed break even with regards to manufacturing, distribution, and sales, and it's a relatively new market for them. It's normal for companies to spend some time till they break even - in the meantime they would acquire market share and establish an ecosystem. Furthermore, it's not Microsoft claiming they make an overall loss - it's the analyst, and "probably" is the word here. Nothing subpar about Surface sales. Next.

schmidtbag:

It is unfortunate, but frankly, it's becoming less necessary to need to open up your own devices. Computers are becoming more and more SoC-ish. People practically never upgrade RAM anymore; usually they buy it once and never think about it again. With cloud or network storage being so prevalent, people don't need as much local storage anymore. In order to make devices thinner, everything has to be soldered to the motherboard. Devices have become thin and compact enough that pretty much the only physical damage you cause makes the entire device junk, regardless of whether you actually have the opportunity to repair it. Hardware efficiency has reached a point where many devices can run fanless, and for the most part, don't degrade so easily from heat. Batteries live long enough that by the time it doesn't hold enough of a charge, your device is obsolete.

I moved to a new position in my company a few months ago and traded in my old Dell 6440 laptop for a new Surface Laptop. OMFG this thing is wonderful to use! The Dell had a fan that went up and down like a roller coaster, but the Surface is completely silent at all times. The Dell was an inch thick and weighed as much as a half brick, but the surface is about even with a spiral notebook. Not to mention the Surface can go a full day without needing a charge, where the dell would die in 4 hours running the same workload. The screen is a quantum leap forward, the keyboard is a joy to type on, the touchpad is almost as good as a macbook... If the trade-off here is not being able to tinker, the benefits are well worth it!

illrigger:

Are you seriously still calling out a computing device for not being repairable in 2018? That's the norm now, and has been since Apple decided everything should be surface mounted a few years back. It's just a necessary evil if you want a light, portable computer.

The ironic part is while most parts in an Apple product are not normally user replaceable, say an iPhone 7 replacing the battery is easy. Your memory goes bad on the logic board in a Macbook, well it's not too hard to replace the whole logic board. Products like the Surface though, parts are usually not modular but the device itself as has been all of the Surface line taking apart the device means basically breaking it just to do it.

yasamoka:

Subpar sales = under expectations / did not make a profit. They passed break even with regards to manufacturing, distribution, and sales, and it's a relatively new market for them. It's normal for companies to spend some time till they break even - in the meantime they would acquire market share and establish an ecosystem. Furthermore, it's not Microsoft claiming they make an overall loss - it's the analyst, and "probably" is the word here. Nothing subpar about Surface sales. Next.

I've always thought of the Surface as a symbolic product - as a showcase for Windows 8/10's hybrid capabilities and to inspire other Windows tablet/laptop makers. It succeeded in that sense, as more than a dozen Surface clones have surfaced over the years (pun intended). It may have even influenced the design of the iPad Pro, a non-Windows mobile device, and Android tablets like the Pixel C (of course these are separate product categories, but it's interesting how Apple and Google picked up on it). I use my SP4 pretty much like a touch laptop. I have the keyboard flipped back most of the time and use the touchscreen to browse casually (I only flip the keyboard out when I need to do some serious typing) As a casual use device, it's about as perfect as it gets, although I wish it was a bit more powerful - I'm hopeful that they will one day incorporate a Ryzen APU (Vega in a Surface? Yes please)

yasamoka:

Subpar sales = under expectations / did not make a profit. They passed break even with regards to manufacturing, distribution, and sales, and it's a relatively new market for them. It's normal for companies to spend some time till they break even - in the meantime they would acquire market share and establish an ecosystem. Furthermore, it's not Microsoft claiming they make an overall loss - it's the analyst, and "probably" is the word here. Nothing subpar about Surface sales. Next.

What’s funny is you want to make up your own definition for sub par, and that’s fine define it how you want, but in my regards it’s because it sold so ridiculously less the the competition that it’s basically non existent in that regards. Now I never knocked the device itself, I think they are great devices and it brings me full circle around to my original comment, what hurt them the most was the complete lack of a price competitive product which they finally have. So now maybe they can actually claim to own a part of the market. You simply want to base off of profit making your argument moot in relation to my post especially considering your articles still show how far behind it is anyway. You probably own a Zune. Next

maikai:

What’s funny is you want to make up your own definition for sub par, and that’s fine define it how you want, but in my regards it’s because it sold so ridiculously less the the competition that it’s basically non existent in that regards. Now I never knocked the device itself, I think they are great devices and it brings me full circle around to my original comment, what hurt them the most was the complete lack of a price competitive product which they finally have. So now maybe they can actually claim to own a part of the market. You simply want to base off of profit making your argument moot in relation to my post especially considering your articles still show how far behind it is anyway. You probably own a Zune. Next

The Surface's competition is other Windows tablets/hybrids, and it holds its own in that category. The price was certainly high but it's not like the Surface clones were markedly better. The Surface is still considered one of the more solid options when it comes to Windows hybrids.

maikai:

What’s funny is you want to make up your own definition for sub par, and that’s fine define it how you want, but in my regards it’s because it sold so ridiculously less the the competition that it’s basically non existent in that regards.

The first actually successful Surface product was the Surface Pro 3. That's 4 years ago. The first MacBook released in 2006, 12 years ago. You're comparing the sales of a subcategory of Windows laptops to the entire category of the alternative, MacBooks. Very logical. That's like saying any brand other than Samsung and Huawei (e.g. OnePlus) has subpar sales of Android phones because it didn't sell as many units as the iPhone. Fascinating conclusion.

Now I never knocked the device itself, I think they are great devices and it brings me full circle around to my original comment, what hurt them the most was the complete lack of a price competitive product which they finally have.

Across the entire Surface lineup, products that were price competitive often failed due to other reasons such as restrictive operating system (e.g. Surface RT). This product needs more than a knocked down price in order to succeed, given it's going up against competition that is generally more price competitive (e.g. Huawei).

So now maybe they can actually claim to own a part of the market. You simply want to base off of profit making your argument moot in relation to my post especially considering your articles still show how far behind it is anyway.

They already own a part of that market. A sizeable chunk of Windows ultraportables is Surface products. Most laptops sold, particularly in companies, are not ultraportables - most are actually MacBooks. You're comparing Apples to Oranges and then insisting this is the reason Surface sales can be considered subpar, and that sort of reasoning doesn't fit.

You probably own a Zune. Next

Nice try, really. Never owned a Zune nor any Apple product. Got my Mom a Surface Pro 3 3 years back and my girlfriend a Surface Pro 4 2 years back. The products aren't without their issues, but they're still solid products. Many friends also use Surface products. Failure rates tend to be higher than usual. Again, nice try, try again. Next.

Ah makes sense, you invested a lot of money in to them so you must now have to defend them with everything you got. Also no im comparing it to other portable devices aka tablets which the majority of consumers view these as. Again back to my original comment, its good to see they finally have a product that people will buy so that they might finally own some of the market and it doesn't end up like every device they have ever released other than the xbox. But im pretty sure its destined to fail anyway because of the App store being rubbish and people buying t Their windows phone also owned 1% of the market, so yea that did well as well lol. Oh but that's apples to oranges right. Lets see, Windows phone, Zune, Microsoft band, and now the Harman Kardon Invoke yup they all were profitable too so they must have been successful, ill go to the store and buy one, oh wait.... (btw I did own multiple windows phones and I also own the Invoke) so although I know you tried to take my OP as a bash it wasn't, and you spun it in to some ridiculous point youre trying to make about being profitable which no one asked

maikai:

Ah makes sense, you invested a lot of money in to them so you must now have to defend them with everything you got.

As I said, the failure rates on them turned out to be rather high so I don't really trust the devices themselves anymore if I wanted to buy one given what I've seen happen. But hey, I have to be biased to object against claiming they suffer from subpar sales? Keep trying.

Also no im comparing it to other portable devices aka tablets which the majority of consumers view these as. Again back to my original comment, its good to see they finally have a product that people will buy so that they might finally own some of the market and it doesn't end up like every device they have ever released other than the xbox.

Not merely tablets - a very specific sort of tablet, the sort that can handle productivity with a fully-fledged OS. Go ahead, compare it to tablets. Tell me about the intended audience of such hybrid devices that combine tablet use, pen use, and quasi-laptop use (with the added Type Cover) and demonstrate how exactly Surface devices suffer from subpar sales. Seriously, they have such subpar sales that about a dozen devices that are almost exact clones of the Surface have shown us from several manufacturers. Miserable sales! Again, enough with the Apples to Oranges comparisons. Just two posts back you were comparing the Surface lineup to MacBooks. Decide.

But im pretty sure its destined to fail anyway because of the App store being rubbish and people buying t Their windows phone also owned 1% of the market, so yea that did well as well lol.

Sales of the Surface never really relied on the Windows App Store being good. Many use cases of the Surface tablets rely on Win32 apps that work well with this form factor - Microsoft Office being one. Microsoft Edge and Drawboard PDF are two UWP apps that do really, really well on the Surface. If they can move over more and more well-designed applications to the Windows Store, I honestly can't see users complaining, particularly if some of those apps are free or come bundled with the device (e.g. Drawboard). Microsoft are trying to push Windows 10 S in order to encourage use of the App Store, but it's literally one toggle away and any perceived failure to penetrate the market with this device in particular will be easily met with just going with an unlocked Windows 10 that can run Win32 apps - aside from the fact that any existing user can choose to unlock their Windows version and use Win32 apps.

Oh but that's apples to oranges right. Lets see, Windows phone, Zune, Microsoft band, and now the Harman Kardon Invoke yup they all were profitable too so they must have been successful, ill go to the store and buy one, oh wait.... (btw I did own multiple windows phones and I also own the Invoke) so although I know you tried to take my OP as a bash it wasn't, and you spun it in to some ridiculous point youre trying to make about being profitable which no one asked

Nice strawman, mentioning other products that were never the subject to begin with and that lie in entirely different contexts. I never said profit was the only factor that demonstrates strong sales having happened. Expectations of how a product will do also matter, and these products, while having made a profit, turned out not to be sustainable in the long run and would have turned into losses. That's expectations. Finally, I have no idea why you are trying to make it out as if I have a bias towards Microsoft. I don't, and it frankly seems to me like some form of projection of your irrational judgment regarding Microsoft's performance in the Surface division. Those "subpar" sales wouldn't have encouraged Microsoft to diverge into the (now successful) Surface Book (2) as well as the Surface Studio. They clearly have an ecosystem going on. They even purchased the company behind Drawboard PDF and bundled that $10 app for free with the Surface Pro 4 onwards, clearly demonstrating that they believe many Surface users are using the Surface Pen for annotation and related work.