Discussion on:

Microsoft Surface: Has iPad's first serious rival finally arrived?

You say "The Google tablet is far less interesting than Microsoft???s Surface devices": I don't see how. The MS products are just vapourware thus far: they may never see the light of day. The Nexus, on the other hand, is with us and its interesting because it has a startlingly low price: which could re define the market. We don't even know what MS will be charging for their devices yet: but I'm willing to bet its a lot more.

but from the sampling I've done from my clients, peers and regular people, so far it's been iPad or Kindle Fire but mostly iPad. The Nexus tablet "could" change that (replacing the Fire in that equation...but I admit it, I like Amazon) but I think the perception of Android tablets has already kind of set in whereas with Windows 8 tablets, and I'm not trying to say which is "better", but with Windows 8 tablets, there's no common "perception" yet outside of the tech industry and some polls have shown excitement. Even some of my semi-techy friends have asked me about Surface which was completely surprising. They've always been iStuff consumers. I think it's because the common consumer hasn't seen a Windows tablet unless they're employed in very specific fields and even though there are "tablets" available, there really hasn't been a common Windows tablet in the running so it's kind of new. If the Nexus tablet came out as one of the first Android tablets, I think it could have then been a game changer because of a great first impression but now, I think it might be lost in the Android crowd. Still though, that doesn't make it any less of a value.

Does anyone know whether the surface tablets will have battery life that is comparable with the Ipad?

... before you would say they seriously rival the iPad? I mean, pre-Nexus, Android tablets are in virtually the same number of hands as iPads, per http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/tablets/infographic-android-closes-the-gap-on-ios/1796?tag=nl.e067

Artificially declaring that the iPad is used for different things than Android tablets ... that'll likely be where this discussion goes. In spite of the lack of data on that.

"And to think just a couple of years ago, Microsoft founder Bill Gates said of the iPad: ???It???s a nice reader, but there???s nothing on the iPad I look at and say, ???Oh, I wish Microsoft had done it???.???"

Has anyone considered the idea that Bill Gates might say the same thing today, except for the sales figures.

Despite those sales figures, the iPad is not a revolutionary device. The only revolution in the iPad is BECAUSE of the sales figures. The device is not revolutionizing the industry. In many ways it is a step backwards. Instead of supplying more, is supplies less, and yes that is part of why it is selling so.

The lesson of the iPad is that most people don't need the computing power of a PC. If Microsoft had pushed Windows Mobile....for all its fault, and they were many...into the tablet space, instead of trying to push Windows XP Tablet Edition, they might have found greater sales success, but that was not Gates' vision. His vision was PCs that you use like a tablet.

I am not sure Gates' would be proud of the iPad, though I am sure he would have loved the sales figures.

If the Surface is business friendly (I.e. It can be managed through, and supports LDAP stores such as Active Directory, and can run Word and Excel) then businesses will buy it in bulk as a reasonable compromise between BYOD and business security and operational needs. Users may never love it, but if it can do those two things, it will outsell the iPad like there's no tomorrow.

IMHO, Steve G.

Seeing as Apple are well known for locking down all their devices and forcing you go through their own store, I am quite grateful for the launch of the surface tablet. It is the first tablet I have seen which I have thought to myself, "you know what... I like this"

I like it so much so that I am very tempted to buy one!

The thing that annoys me with Apple is that they do not bring out anything "new". It is all stuff we have seen before but because it is on an iPad/iPhone it is amazing. I had an iPhone 3gs and when it came to my upgrade I chose the Samsung Galaxy S2. (S3 wasn't around then!) The reason I did not upgrade to the 4s is because apart from Siri it is practically the same. I could not justify an "upgrade" which is the same as what it was before, albeit in a nice fancy case, a new camera and Siri. The same can also be said for the iPad.

Apple have never been innovators. They have always taken an idea which already exists, make it their own and sell big. From the first mouse, PCs and even tablets they still do it so well to this day.

Do not get me wrong, I love Apple but I want them to bring out something new that is not a small upgrade from the previous. I do however really love the way that they make things so seamless. They are very good at taking things and making them work in a way that works remarkably well! Like iCloud, iTunes and Siri, they work so brilliantly. You can tell that Apple spend a lot of time and money making their devices work perfectly but I worry that this stops them from moving forward with their own ideas.