News Microsoft's Surface hits trouble

[Gareth Halfacree]

Lawsuits, bugs and failures abound.
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardwar...face-trouble/1

[LennyRhys]

This is what Microsoft deserves for trying to take a stab at Apple's niche market IMO.

[Flibblebot]

Why, exactly? Surely any competition to Apple should be welcomed, as it can only benefit the consumer?

I think MS were a bit quick to push out the Surface and Windows RT though - it sounds as though it could have spent a few more months in development - especially if the OS is taking up somewhere in the region of 12-15Gb (I'm assuming the installed apps don't take up too much space)

[GoodBytes]

I guess this is why Steve Sinofsky left Microsoft. He rushed deliver products, without taking the time to see manufactured produced products, and leave proper amount of time for polishing. Already we know that Office 2013 is really rushed, with its silly performance issue, clearly indicating that Office was not yet reached the stage of optimization.

The capacity lawsuit is just silly. I hope that the judge will just dismiss it, else from now on, you'll see all OEMs computer say how much used space is taken on computer, and other silly info. Like McDonald peanut bag, which has a large label saying pretty much: This bag of peanuts, which is clearly identified as peanuts, contains peanuts. Or like Hot Coffee is hot warnings. The user can still return the tablet if he is not happy. Yet he decided to try and make a few bucks on Microsoft.

The WiFi issue seams to be related with compatibility with routers. When I got my laptop 4 years ago with the Intel wireless card, I had a similar issue. Worked perfectly at home, but didn't with the new school wireless N network, 4 years ago. I had connections problems, similar to what is being described about the Surface. I called Dell, and a tech came over the next day to replace the wireless card with the same, but a newer revision (I had Dell next business day onsite service), and voila, no more problems.

My guess is that a new revision of the wireless card was released and it doesn't play nice with some routers (probably early draft N ones, would be my guess). That would be just bad luck for Microsoft.

As for HP Todd Bradley, comments. I guess, I think he never used any of it's products. Because HP systems not only breaks after a year, but the user experience is abysmal at best. Have anyone saw their touch screen all in one. You can't even scroll somewhat smoothly on it with it's custom interface layout. What a joke. And like Acer, they have nothing to show. So again, big words, but they are far worse.

[Hustler]

Steve Balmer's day of reckoning with the shareholders gets one step closer...the sooner they ditch that buffoon the better,

[[PUNK] crompers]

Either way the negative press is out and the damage is done to a certain extent. Products like this rise or fall on the back of hype IMO.

[SlowMotionSuicide]

Originally Posted by GoodBytes

The capacity lawsuit is just silly.

I respectfully disagree. I know you're not getting the full advertised space from practically anything, I believe most tablets and smartphones eat like 20-30 % of available space and it's perfectly normal and universally acknowledged. But being able to utilize only 50% of the advertised capacity has a strong smell of fraudulent bullshit on it tbh.

[[PUNK] crompers]

All that will happen is they'll add "up to" before the quoted GBs

[theshadow2001]

Originally Posted by GoodBytes

The capacity lawsuit is just silly. I hope that the judge will just dismiss it, else from now on, you'll see all OEMs computer say how much used space is taken on computer, and other silly info.

I don't think its silly at all. Frankly this industry is full of rubbish specs. The hard drive industry states their capacity as multiple of 1000Megabytes and the operating systems formats them into a capacity of multiples 1024 Megabytes so you loose a chunk of your storage space from advertised. Networking equipment, well frankly I just don't know where that segment gets their specs from, certainly not from reality. Low end power supplies can over state their true wattage potential. Broadband company rarely tell the truth about what speed you'll be getting. BS marketing on silly technicalities needs to be beaten into bloody pulp and wiped off the face to the planet.

I will concede that the idea of advertising a 32GB system and having half of that taken up by the system is not the most egregious example of this kind of BS marketing, but I still lump it in their with the rest.

[Marvin-HHGTTG]

Originally Posted by SlowMotionSuicide

I respectfully disagree. I know you're not getting the full advertised space from practically anything, I believe most tablets and smartphones eat like 20-30 % of available space and it's perfectly normal and universally acknowledged. But being able to utilize only 50% of the advertised capacity has a strong smell of fraudulent bullshit on it tbh.

PCs have always been quoted as such though (with the addition that in storage 500GB != 500x1024x1024x1024B but 500x1000x1000x1000B and so this is also somewhat false) - this laptop has a 500GB harddrive, which is actually 460 ish, which has 25GB of Windows and 45GB of random OEM added crap, leaving 390GB. It's the way it seems to be at the moment, and so picking on Microsoft and no-one else seems a little strange. Especially so when 32GB on Android is really 25GB, but this varies all the time with some using more, others less. It's a very grey area, and somewhat unfair to pick on one vendor.

[rollo]

As I've said before, the tablet market is just apple at least where profit is concerned and little else matters in the scheme of things. I'd be surprised If sales have passed 1million. Which I'd imagine is below break even once marketing and R&D gets added on.

Without content the general consumer could not care less for a tablet and that's been proven time and again by the sales everyone but apple has achieved.

[kenco_uk]

Originally Posted by theshadow2001

I don't think its silly at all. Frankly this industry is full of rubbish specs. The hard drive industry states their capacity as multiple of 1000Megabytes and the operating systems formats them into a capacity of multiples 1024 Megabytes so you loose a chunk of your storage space from advertised. Networking equipment, well frankly I just don't know where that segment gets their specs from, certainly not from reality. Low end power supplies can over state their true wattage potential. Broadband company rarely tell the truth about what speed you'll be getting. BS marketing on silly technicalities needs to be beaten into bloody pulp and wiped off the face to the planet.

I will concede that the idea of advertising a 32GB system and having half of that taken up by the system is not the most egregious example of this kind of BS marketing, but I still lump it in their with the rest.

I've always wondered how Apple have managed to falsely advertise their devices as having certain capacities. With iOS6 taking up a chunk of the available ram, you lose not far off 1GB of space. On a 64GB device perhaps that's not as noticeable but on a 16GB iPad it means a fair amount less songs or two or three less films - even a gig's-worth of apps can be a fair amount.

[Griffter]

anyone that is surprised microsoft has brought out a sub-par product, hardware wise 60% and 40% software, is either in denial or fictitious. many windows shot t=in the dark versions, xbox bricking and this after the testing books that came out stating the faults and not ready parts of the xbox360 before release to still release it, to this.

making money is one thing, but shafting it to everyone is another... IMO

[Snips]

Actually, I've not encountered these problems. Has anyone else here had these problems?

With new innovative products, you get the odd moan from other brand fanboys. Microsoft need applauding for giving the world a better alternative to the iPad.

[theshadow2001]

Originally Posted by Griffter

anyone that is surprised microsoft has brought out a sub-par product, hardware wise 60% and 40% software, is either in denial or fictitious. many windows shot t=in the dark versions, xbox bricking and this after the testing books that came out stating the faults and not ready parts of the xbox360 before release to still release it, to this.

making money is one thing, but shafting it to everyone is another... IMO

Although I have trouble deciphering your post. I think I agree with you on the xbox thing. People left right and centre were having red rings of death. Making peripherals is one thing. But when it comes to high complexity integrated devices such as the xbox, microsoft left a lot to be desired in the quality department.

[Marvin-HHGTTG]

Difference between then and now is that people actually seem to give a **** about build quality in their tech devices nowadays, so I'd be interested to see whether the next gen consoles change in that regard (metal cases, better cooling etc?). A lot has changed since the 360 release (which came out before the first iPhone for starters...).

I do think that Microsoft rushed a bit with Windows 8/WP8/Modern UI. The product feels finished to specification, but no additional features were added, and little further optimisation done. Given a bit of time and a few patches, I reckon we'll see a great product, but for now, there's something missing. Evidence of this can be easily seen with Modern UI app support - only C++ and C# development, despite having pushed F# for some years now, a lack of "nice to haves" (no serial protocol support in modern UI?), and this is just from the developer side.

[Griffter]

Originally Posted by theshadow2001

Although I have trouble deciphering your post. I think I agree with you on the xbox thing. People left right and centre were having red rings of death. Making peripherals is one thing. But when it comes to high complexity integrated devices such as the xbox, microsoft left a lot to be desired in the quality department.

apologies, i was about to go into a meeting and just typed what was coming out of my fingers...

as for snips, i am not a fanboy, i work with a mac, and use a pc at home, have an xbox and ps3, and with all this, microsoft products have always been last for the most cases in quality. its not an opinion if cases of complaints and frustration comes to light in the public eye, but fact.

[veato]

I was genuinely shocked when I found out half the 32GB is used up by the OS. Of course when I buy a device I expect some of the space to be taken by the system but half? Really?

My boss is using one to test at work and frankly it's not good for us. It won't even synch with exchange because of policies in place nor access the remote portals (e.g. Juniper). The answer around seems to be that the RT simply is not a corporate device but then neither is the iPad and they work absolutely fine with our Exchange and remote access portals.

[SlowMotionSuicide]

Originally Posted by Marvin-HHGTTG

PCs have always been quoted as such though (with the addition that in storage 500GB != 500x1024x1024x1024B but 500x1000x1000x1000B and so this is also somewhat false) - this laptop has a 500GB harddrive, which is actually 460 ish, which has 25GB of Windows and 45GB of random OEM added crap, leaving 390GB. It's the way it seems to be at the moment, and so picking on Microsoft and no-one else seems a little strange. Especially so when 32GB on Android is really 25GB, but this varies all the time with some using more, others less. It's a very grey area, and somewhat unfair to pick on one vendor.

Problem here, for me at least, is that MS is trying to get away with delivering ~50% less storage capacity than advertised, instead of the "regular" 20% were used to. This needs to stop before other manufacturers start to think they can get away with it too.

[Guinevere]

Originally Posted by SlowMotionSuicide

I respectfully disagree. I know you're not getting the full advertised space from practically anything, I believe most tablets and smartphones eat like 20-30 % of available space and it's perfectly normal and universally acknowledged. But being able to utilize only 50% of the advertised capacity has a strong smell of fraudulent bullshit on it tbh.

I respectfully suggest you look into the facts.

A 32GB iPad has approximately 28GB of usable space.
A 32GB Surface has approximately 16GB of usable space.
A 16GB iPad has approximately 14GB of usable space.

So looking at price and usable space alone, for the same outlay you get 16GB of space vs 14GB... but Microsoft say 32GB vs 16GB which is 2:1 when it's actually 1.14:1. The surface still works out better (on this score) but not by as much as MS would let you believe.