News Microsoft Surface Pro 3 specs, prices leak

So on the price and hardware side of things Microsoft questions the one-size-fits-all approach, but when it comes to the OS it would seem they don't follow the same mantra.

 

"Full fat Windows 8", dislike.

 

Well that's what Microsoft keep telling people, Windows 8: One OS to Rule Them All.

 

...and in the Blue Screen bind them

 

It would be nice if they had a $599 version with 4GB and 64GB of storage and a z3770 or z3775 (I think that is the new top of the line bay trail-t coming out shortly) in it below the i3 version.

 

The idea is that the GUI is recognisably similar. There are also universal apps (work on Windows Phone, RT and x86) and of course cloud syncing.

Oh, and:

Surely if the bezel is smaller alongside a larger screen, the overall dimensions of the device should remain the same and the existing Covers will fit? Seems to make sense to me.

In any case, this may mean cheap second-hand Surface Pro 2's hitting the market. My body is ready.

 

Is that why there are two of them.

Universal apps are great in principal. But what happens if someone doesn't want their new app to switch them in and out of the modern UI, or if the rumored surface mini comes out with a 7-8 inch screen and i want my app to run on a 4K screen, or if as a developer i want to charge more or less on one device like on phones versus PCs

And I'm not to sure the cloud is the best place to store personal data, what with the amount of security and privacy issues or possible downtime, such as that experienced recently by Adobe leaving people with no access to important work for 24h.

 

If there's a healthy price drop on the Surface 2 RT, I might be tempted to grab one of those - can't see that they'll offer any spec improvements to tempt me with the third generation.

 

Yup. Similar ≠ identical.

I guess the same that happens with iOS apps running on iPhone and iPad: it recognises the available resolution/hardware and adapts. Developers charge a single price across platforms. And if people don't want a Modern app to switch them in and out of Modern, don't download a Modern app.

Yeah, that's why you also keep local backups. Which is what OneDrive conveniently does if you tell it to.

Some years ago there was this NHS executive who lost a memory stick with patient identifiable information on it. Did the NHS get rid of all memory sticks? No. It just got encrypted ones and told people not to use them for patient identifiable information (duh!). There always be idiots, but that's not technology's fault.

 

Stop using fancy symbols, it took me blooming ages to find out what ≠ meant

But the desktop GUI is nothing like the Modern GUI, a desktop user won't even have a similar experience to a phone or tablet user. Giving people two GUI's in one OS doesn't make for a similar experience, it just makes people play guessing games as to what GUI a certain device, or application is going to use.

Isn't not downloading the Modern app just going to break the similar experience Microsoft is attempting to create with their One OS to Rule Them All idea.
iOS developers are already experiencing problems with having to include different assets in universal apps so they can run on different displays and devices, I'm not sure people are going to be to happy with having to download a 50Mb application on their phone if a large portion of that isn't even needed.

No it isn't technology's fault, but it was the fault of whom ever decided to use un-encrypted patient identifiable information on a memory stick when they were first introduced.
The fact that nothing untoward happened and the situation could be improved is fortunate, the NHS had the option of changing to encrypted memory sticks, it had the option to prevent people from storing patient identifiable information on them.

Even though we have the option ATM to tell OneDrive to keep local backups how many people just except the default, I'm assuming local backups are not the default. How long before we are in a situation such as people who have to use Adobe products, forced into using the cloud.

 

I think most of the time it's pretty obvious, to be honest. Stuff downloaded from Windows Store is Metro. Stuff downloaded old skool through the browser usually is not. As long as it is well-suited to the function and operation of the app, what does it matter what type GUI it has?

On my Surface, the two GUI work pretty well BTW. Metro in tablet mode; desktop when I perch it on the desk as a laptop.

Arguably Android developers have an even bigger headache. Yet they all seem to manage. And remember how your browser somehow seems to know what OS you are running and download the correct version of an application? App stores can do the same thing.

I'm sorry, but that is the end user's problem --know the software you are using. Especially if you do so for a living, Adobe user. It's like arguing against cars because some people are too dumb to recognise that occasionally you have to check the oil and tire pressure. I don't know a professional lorry driver who doesn't have an intimate knowledge of their lorry. I don't know a (decent) chef who doesn't know the food and tools he cooks with. The research psychologists I work with can operate the SPSS statistical package blindfolded (there's this girl who is mesmerising to watch. She operates SPSS so fast that the GUI turns into a blur).

 

If users are having to choose between two different GUI's it does nothing to further the One OS to Rule Them All idea, if anything it just splits it into to halves.
Maybe at some point Microsoft may merge those two halves into one GUI, but the rumors saying they are bringing back a start menu that will show live tiles isn't the right direction (imho).

True, but detecting what OS someone is running and downloading the correct version isn't a universal application (imho).

In part it's an end user problem. Users can choose to enable certain options or use different products, but what should they do when those options are taken away from them.

In a perfect world everyone using a computer would be a professional computer operator, sadly that is not the case. I would guess the majority of people using computers wouldn't have a clue how to change settings, or even what does or doesn't happen without their knowledge or say so.

Re the checking of oil level in cars, 75% of drivers don't know how to do that.

 

I think that you are confusing OS with GUI. And Microsoft will work it out. It has done so before.

Doesn't have to be. It just has to be embedded in the relevant Store and the browser. As it already is.

That is a totally different debate.

Cars: designed by computer, built by robots and driven by idiots. Again, it is not a design flaw of the car that its driver is a complacent moron. It's not the computer's fault if a user chooses not to learn the basics of its operation.

 

Maybe i am, but you started it when you said..."The idea is that the GUI is recognisably similar." And they are not in there current form.

So not the universal application, or One OS to Rule Them All, but different GUI's, different applications, different way of doing things, etc, etc.

Isn't it one of the many reasons why the cloud is a bad idea.

But it is a design flaw if the default option is to not warn the driver of low oil levels, or to have no indication of potential problems. Just like it's a design flaw for Adobe products to stop working if they can't authenticate with the servers.

 

Microsoft has had little problems getting its OS out there due to the complete lack of competition in the desktop laptop area. Mac OSX is still sub 10%.

Does not mean each OS they have made has been awesome. Windows ME windows vista and windows 8 all had flaws some still have them.

GUI is totally different to OS enough the differences between windows 98 and 7 are pretty small if you disable aero.

 

Fair dos. There are two issues here: do all the OS's have shared code so the same apps can run on all of them, and do the GUI have recognisable elements. Microsoft is working towards that on both front, but given that historically different teams worked on different platforms, it is not surprising that convergence will take a while. Hardware has also had some catching up to do.

No. The code is the same; the graphic resources may come in different versions for different size screens, but that should be rare as many graphic elements are dynamically resizable --especially in Metro.

In the same way that a power outage makes cloud storage a bad idea. In the same way that people not being able to check the oil and change a tyre makes cars a bad idea. Baby ≠ bath water.

That doesn't make cars a bad idea --it just means they need an oil light. Similarly it does not make cloud storage a bad idea; Adobe just needs a backup plan.

 

The code is probably the smallest portion of an application, the portion that takes up most of an application (graphical elements) maybe resizable, but when it can't be the user is still downloading elements they may not need.
IMHO it would be better if universal application were designed to download the core files, that could be shared between different devices, then need a connection on first run, or install to download the specific files needed for the platform it's running on.

Not a bad idea, just something that the user needs to be aware of.
In the same way as people know if they have a power cut they may not be able to run their appliances, or may not be able to do businesses. If having power is vital to them doing business then they would have a backup generator.

Indeed, but what do you do when your car maker wont put in an oil light, or Adobe doesn't implement a backup plan. My guess is you start to look around for a company that does.