I believe the 'fragility' argument falls flat when comparing them
I think they're both equally fragile, even if differently so. Arguing that you're afraid of damaging an iPad even with an Otterbox cover vs a naked Surface tablet under similar conditions is simply reaching. All electronics are fragile; that's why different companies do make 'hardened' versions and cases for them. How many of you broke even that tiny screen on that brick-like original Nintendo GameBoy?
The comments about "putting fake screenshots as the cover of the app just to make it appear to load faster" is pure bunk--iOS does NOT do that; it takes you straight to the Mail app without a splash page.
Perhaps the browser experience on Surface is better--I won't argue that considering that IE10 is a much cleaner and standards-compliant web browser than IE 6 and probably significantly more streamlined than even IE 9. I will admit I don't always like reaching a 'mobile' web page when browsing with Safari, but I also can't complain about how well Safari works. In other words, I don't plan to argue that either one is better, or worse, than the other.
Some of the other things mentioned might be of benefit to going Surface--if you play XBox games all the time, for instance. Free streaming music is available on both platforms and streaming to TV is easy with both platforms--even if done slightly differently. On the other hand, I personally find the idea of using an SD card as an external drive (Ok, removable drive) more a hindrance than a help since videos and files can be transferred wirelessly much more easily and seamlessly--especially photos and productivity files that synch without even the need to trigger that process--it's automatic when you come in range of a public Wi-Fi signal.
Does Surface have its advantages? Certainly. It's integration with the Windows environment is far smoother and intuitive than anything Android has done up to now.
