Discussion on:

Hands on: Microsoft Surface vs. Apple iPad

It is decision time for my wife and me. Our old Toshiba is crapping out (the thing lasted forever, I think on its 6th year maybe). Desktop is definitely a no-no, laptop might be ok if it is low enough on the cost end, but Surface seems to be best idea so far. My wife really wanted an iPad until she saw what it could do (or not do more like it). We went to MS store this weekend to check out Surface, and she really just fell in love with it. Not sure about price of the top model coming out next year, I have a powerful laptop for my work but my wife wants something she can use Office on and do some basic photo editing. Going to play like a lot though, the waiting game to get as many reviews as possible in before deciding. I doubt price is going to adjust, so not really waiting for that.

I own both devices "new iPad" and Surface. Hands down barebones without any cases the Surface I am sure would win ever time over ruggedness over the surface. I do not worry about the Surface like I do anytime my child comes by even with an Otterbox case on the iPad.

The Surface is great with either keyboard but just as good without. I was able to type very fast just on the face of the surface device.

I think the browsing experience is much better on the Surface with a full IE 10 browser. iPads acts only as a mobile browser or you have to use the Atomic Web app or I am sure other non-safari browsers to get a better experience. The integration with Twitter and Facebook is tight and a great experience.

I don't see the lag that the author describes or if it is there it isn't enough to matter much at all. iPad and iPhone apps hide the delay a bit with putting fake screenshots as the cover of the app just to make it appear to load faster. Not a bad trick but I'll have to do some testing more on my own to compare the 2 devices in other apps.

Options for free streaming music, connecting with the Xbox 360, plugging a Xbox controller into the USB port to play games...come on that is hot, standard micro-HDMI cables for connecting to your TV or second monitor, micro-SD card adapter for 32GB of extra storage for my ripped DVD's and regular USB port for transferring anything else needed....all that = not possible on the iPad. (ok I'll give you Airplay)

There are things that are missing, but having Android, iPad, and Surface all at my finger tips. I will grab the Surface anytime I need more power than my Lumia 920 Windows Phone. My kids seem to get the iPad to play with.

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.

Thanks for bringing "bunk" back into my vocabulary, it has been truly missed.
I was referring to developer apps. I will do some testing on apple apps like you mention.

http://developer.apple.com/library/ios/#documentation/iphone/conceptual/iphoneosprogrammingguide/App-RelatedResources/App-RelatedResources.html

Your app must include at least one image to be displayed while your app is launching. The system displays this image to provide the user with immediate feedback that your app is launching. For information about launch images, see App Launch (Default) Images.

Neither

The key differentiator between iOS and Windows RT is not just the number of apps available, but the quality of apps and usage scenarios they enable, especially for SMBs. iPad is the clear winner in this regard with many high quality apps for cloud-enabled productivity.

I actually expected the apps argument to be presented in the comparison and was surprised when it didn't. You're right that iOS has far more apps available that Win RT, and even though MS promised over 100,000 new apps in the store by end of January iOS will still trounce it.

That said, there is no Office for iOS. That's huge. It will take time for Win RT to catch up, but with developers being able to easily port their app from Windows Phone to Win RT tablets to Win 8 desktops I think the ground will be made up quickly.

And while the Surface Pro is not really comparable to the iPad since its hardware is so superior, being able to run compatible Windows applications opens up a market far larger than iOS.

Sure, there are some decent Android apps, but when you find two apps with the same name and developer on both iOS and Android, more often the iOS app is the higher-quality app in both appearance and functionality.

That said, I expect to see RT apps blow away the average Android app for the same reason--a much better infrastructure behind the OS offering a measure of security and interoperability with other Windows devices.

Quality is going to be much more important for RT apps than quantity.

All you have to do is look at what Android had when they started and at how, after 4 years, they're roughly equivalent in numbers with at least a few Android apps as good as their iOS equivalents. RT is more likely to see quality apps more quickly as it plays and lives off of the Windows ecosystem more readily.

Comparing Surface vs iPad2. Note the '2' after iPad. v1 is rarely better than v2. How many people still prefer original iPad to iPad2?

Once MS have developed their legs in the tablet industry I'm sure that they (MS) will take off and maybe even seize the tablet throne from Apple.

Is there an Apple cloud based office suite?

Office365 gets you office on your desktop, and office on your tablet. Web based, or running local.

Add in skydrive, and you have continuity between your devices, and your data.

If your company has Sharepoint... Apple isn't in that market.

Cloud based productivity is not Apples strong suit.

It's called the iWorks suite.

I have have a surface & ipad,If you are sharing the tablet with teens and other then the multiple profiles on the surface are a great feature. Had experiences on ipad of replies made to some of my work emails & facebook updates I never made having forgot to log out of it. Prefer surface myself.

No. 1. Battery life. The real Surface (not the near useless RT one) is rumored to have an extremely short battery life. True or false? I'll tell you this - battery life is never a concern for me with the iPad. Never. I don't even have to think about it. Using a Surface must be like flying a glider - you are always conscious about how far you are away from a (air)port to land (charge) it.

No. 2. With regards to the screen you compared the expensive Surface to Apple's cheapest bargain basic iPad (full-size). Is that fair by any stretch of the imagination? Are you telling me that as a tech pundit you haven't even looked at an iPad 3 or 4 yet? If you haven't, just how are you qualified to be writing this article since anyone even considering a Surface at its high cost would very likely also be considering purchasing an ipad 3 or 4, and not a bottom basement iPad 2?

No. 3. You're a user of a Windows phone, and not one of their near immediately superannuated 7 models, but a spanking new 920. Believe it or not, you are in a very small minority. You consequently must possess a built-in bias no matter how much you deny it. iPhone users have accumulated numerous apps and working styles and workflows (iCloud is a big one now) and all of them just work, immediately, on the iPad. Actually better in most cases, because of the iPad's bigger screen and the fact that most iPhone apps work in an acceptable manner on the iPad. You make no mention of this. Call it the iOS ecosphere or whatever you want, but it is big and vast To ignore it in an article like this you must either be nearsighted or biased.

No. 1 - The straw-man argument goes nowhere. The review was of the Surface RT, not the Surface Pro, and the RT has similar battery life to the iPad. The Pro is so much more than the RT or iPad that its not fair to compare the two.

No. 2 - Most reviewers agree that the retina display has a higher resolution which makes text appear sharper. Other than that, side-by-side comparisons show that there is little difference between the two in color, contrast, and overall quality of picture. Plus its widescreen, which even Apple is finally admitting is superior by making their new iPhone conform.

No. 3 - Ad homonym attacks are never appreciated. Please refrain from attacking the person rather than their opinion.

I must take issue with TNT on his point 2. A phone is only practical if it can be hand held which limits its width so if you want a larger screen you've got to go widescreen (or tallscreen in portrait mode). It's a simple geometric fact that for a given screen diagonal the maximum area is a square. As a 4:3 screen is significantly closer to a square than a 16:9 screen, it's got significantly more screen area - actually 12.33% more. What I fail to understand is this fixation with widescreen. You can watch widescreen movies on any screen; you just end up with black bars top and bottom on a squarer screen. I've heard comments like "but you're not using the whole screen!" So what? Do you only drive your car when it has its full complement of passengers? The advantage of having a car with more than one seat is that it's useful when you do need to transport a family. A 4:3 screen is useful when you have an app that needs more area - such as a web page. Let's look at web pages: most are longer than they are wide so portrait view is preferable. But with a tall screen, the width is restricted so you either can't see the full width of the page or you have to shrink it so that it's less legible. OK, we can view it in landscape but with a widescreen that means more vertical scrolling than with a 4:3 screen. I rest my case: a squarer format is much more practical for web surfing and gives more surface area for a given screen diagonal. So unless you find black bars intolerable when watching movies, the better option is 4:3. So well done Apple on your choice of 4:3 for the iPad

in the past, but most newer sites and redesigns are pushing for fluid layout that works whether on a phone, tablet, or desktop with 4:3, 16:10, 16:9 screens at various sizes. So wider screens are becoming more useful. Also with the Surface (or most any Windows 8 tablet), you can dock an app to the left or right and have a 1024x768 (4:3, minimum) screen for web browsing.

The following review statement is quite telling, "At this stage in its evolution, if I had to choose only one tablet, Id pick the iPad. While it doesnt offer the productivity of Surface, its a very complementary device to the laptop thats likely going to end up in my bag anyway."

So, the iPAD isn't enough for serious (or prolonged or Office-type) work, which means you need another device that is--so a laptop or Surface. The Surface isn't a great tablet, but it will do if you had to throw in only one device but need Office with you. Hmm: sounds like you'd eventually tire of "two devices to carry on" and end up opting for the Surface. I don't think you'd miss that much (except, currently, the slew/fload/diaspora of iOS apps).

Then again, neither is the Surface RT. They are both supplemental devices while the Surface Pro will be yet another attempt to bring full-powered desktop computing to a tablet device--though this time with the advantage of offering true mobility capabilities as well.

Of course, the Surface Pro will also suffer most of the same disadvantages of all those 'tablet' predecessors, too--short battery life only the worst of the bunch.

Apps is a huge argument for the iPhone or even Android above the RT. MS and their fans are saying just wait we will catch up but, will they? The Windows phone is doing poorly in the market and App development is slow compared to the competition, this could be a foreshadowing of RT's success. There are no real major programs on the RT except Office (at least parts of it) and it is a poor port from the computer version that is all but useless when using the RT as a tablet. All major companies are writing for iPhone and some Android. Based on this there is a very strong case that the RT will never gain traction and will remain a nitch player.

I also agree with the analysis that a wide screen is a very poor choice for a pad device. It is very clumsy to use, this was known from some of the Android pads that tried it. 3:4 is the optimal large pad. I have found that the 9:15 does work on a 7" pad because the small size still makes it manageable.

to base that kind of argument on them. The iPhone didn't have any apps when it came out other than what Apple itself chose to put in; it took almost a year before they decided to let third-party developers write for it. Android, too, didn't have any apps worth speaking of when it came out, though they did open their SDKs much more quickly. Microsoft has already opened their SDKs for WP8/RT development and as such could realize a much faster growth of apps than you seem to expect.

Which touches on the other part of that point: WP8 is different enough from WP7 and predecessors to totally eliminate the vast majority of their faults; however, WP8/RT must also battle the reputation that the old WinMob gained--and it takes work to reverse that kind of momentum. People really need to come into the Windows 8 ecosystem with an open mind--something of which very few seem capable. Even as a long-time Apple user for MacOS, OS X and iOS, I can see the potentials here--as long as Microsoft itself doesn't mess it up.

But when the iPhone came out it opened a whole new market with no comparable competitors to speak of. Android likewise was the first real option to the iPhone and was open source which helped its growth. Now, both platforms are well established, have large App environments and have good reputations. W7/8 comes to the party very late with few apps, no real advantages, same costs and the Windows reputation baggage to deal with. There is just no real compelling reason to select a W7/8 phone over the competition.

it sounds like WP7/8 will never get any where, but if you look back at when the iPhone came out, there was already many mobile platforms that had more (Windows Mobile, Palm Pilots, Blackberry, etc.). So why bother coming out with an iPhone? Because technology was now at price points that would allow more people into markets that were previously niches. This was true for the iPad as well. There were tablets of various kinds before the iPad, they were just too expensive for most people to buy. Now that touch based hardware is nearly everywhere, this market is open for even more products.

Let's see, in hardware, no mention of the CPU used, the amount of memory, the amount of usable memory, the amount of SD storage (embedded or sockets), no mention of 3D video capabilities or screen resolution (differences) or overall performance... but the build quality is similar so what else matters?

What about basic software comparison? Features? Speed / time to complete basic tasks? Video playback performance, web browsing performance, multitasking capability, etc.? Nope, no details there either.

So the article distills down to... they both look nice and they both have an operating system so they are comparable. Thanks for the insights.

Well have been using the iPad 1 for some time now, 2 years almost I would guess , give or take a couple of months. It has effectively replaced my laptop. It does most of what I need, send emails, check info on the web, download files, annotate , etc. it does most everything.

It's fast, and is super convenient. Battery life is another plus. I'd say best device in its class. The trick is that what it does it does extremely well. I also read books on it, play the occasional game and it hasn't let me down once. Push the start button, and presto, it's ready to go. Brilliantly conceived , that's the genius of Jobs I guess.

What makes a tablet a tablet?
Right now, 10 point touch vs 5 point touch? Size? (tablets are too small!) Apps? (Everybody's got them)

So, throw in the Lenovo Thinkpad Twist.
Bigger screen - Finally!
Light
Real RAM and HD
Keyboard
And More.

Realistically you should not compare the iPad 2 with the Surface. The iPad 2 is now superseded by 2 newer iterations, so a comparison would be better served using the latest model.

However, I'm currently holding out for the Surface Pro edition. Would love to see how this one works. I'm using Windows 8 on a desktop and find it less then inspiring, but am hoping the OS is better suited to tablet computing. I have an iPad 3, and absolutely love the thing. But to have a solid tablet with the ability to run native windows apps is definitely an enticing prospect.

I have both the Surface and an iPad, I actually find myself using the Surface tablet much more now than the ipad. Grant it, there are more apps to choose from in the apple store, however I tend to buy the apps to get me through what I need. I'm not an app collector that seeks out new apps and just download them because I can. If it provides no valuable functionality then I don't bother with it.

Surface compliments my laptop better because It does some of the things that my laptop does. Light weight duties, like file management, Box, Skydrive, and other light lifting windows tasks, not to mention the MS office products. I also love the surface interactive and live interface as opposed to the quickly aging ipad desktop. I'm not going to get rid of my ipad just yet, but if this trend of me using Surface more often continues, I'll probably sell my ipad and maybe even upgrade to a surface pro. Which might replace both my ipad and my laptop.

I have been fiddling Windows 8 around my desktop and also my old Acer 1825ptz convertible tablet. I find it's performance impressive to be able to run on such lowly hardware. Of course I'm not expecting to play Crysis on my tablet but so far, reading my mails, checking out my contacts via Peaple app, and replying messages via Messaging app in Windows 8 has been superbly well. The touch factor works pretty well too.

But I think most people get mixed up between Windows 8 RT and Windows 8 Pro. The surface runs Windows 8 RT while the Surface Pro runs Windows 8 Pro. For the Surface with Windows 8 RT, I think it defeats the purpose of having Windows. It's like having a brand new platform in competing against iOS and Android while there is a better Windows 8 which has all the apps and capabilities of Windows 8 RT, all the productivity of Windows 7 and the performance of Linux/Mac OS. The way I see it, hybrid tablets will open the path to the future such as the Surface Pro, Lenovo Thinkpad Tablet 2 and also HP Elitepad 900. IMO, these are the real future changing computing devices.

I never really liked the iPad with its walled garden approach, lack of common file sharing and 'watered down' apps. The Surface is a joy to use but its greatest asset is the real productivity. Not only is Office included, but excellent SkyDrive integration, social media integration and Remote Desktop for when you have to use work resources. Desktop provides Explorer for proper file manipulation. The gestures are easy to learn and the battery life is most impressive.

The iPad has been put away and the Surface is my new daily tool.

It never fails. Companies trying to hit a price point instead of producing the best darn device of its type has really gotten old to me. I for one, am sick and tired of buying something, then watching a bigger and better one come out a week later. Bean counters have taken over in every aspect of our lives and left a stream of disappointed buyers in their wake. When is somebody going to fire the damn bean counters, then in saving the money they would have had to pay them in wages, build something the way they really wanted to in the first place. You would have thought that MS would have taken a lesson with the Zune. What a POS.

Why would you be concerned at a 'bigger and better one' coming out after your purchase? Did you not consider its value at the time of purchase and decide it was worth the money? What difference does it make to an item's meeting your requirements and generating satisfaction what comes after it?

I used to own an ipad 2 and gettings things done was much slower

Now I can flick between apps with the flick of the hand, and it feels fun to use

The ipad on the otherhand, I always found boring

Good points. I too have had use of both tablets (iPad 2 and Surface RT), though somewhat limited for the Surface RT and conclude there is room for both; which is why I don't think an "apples to apples" comparison can be made between the two. A mobile professional like me will likely opt for both for the reasons you stated. However, my choice of Surface will be the Surface Pro to replace my 3lb laptop for everyday mobility and travel. Both units will likely find their way into my totebag.

The RT is solidly built, the integrated kickstand, native MS Office (even with its limitations ie no Excel macros), the USB port and the microSDX which, at some point will be capable of holding terabytes (probably at a substantial cost) are the big selling points for me. Surface scores big as a result of these features, regardless of any current deficiencies which, I believe, will be ironed out over time and use. Simply the ability to hold my multimedia collection on a 64GB microSDX or Microsoft's cloud without sacrificing hard drive space and the ability to use a mouse with a tablet are huge.

There is definitely room for both; like all mobile devices, it depends on the individual usage patterns--which should be the drivers for any mobile device purchase.

I also have found that the apps that you use in the metro interface are slow to open and slow to do basic tasks. They also have such limited functionality that you're better off using browser based apps - like Outlook.com over the built in Mail app for example. Sort it out Microsoft.

Since a lap top can do everything both can do. If you just like to carry around toys and/or have some propensity to always have some electronic device with you then that is your thing and nothing wrong with that. Other wise 99% of the rest of the world can do just fine with one laptop. Okay, I admit I have three, and 9 desktops hooked into 7 moitors, but then I'm in the trade. Trust me, I never get the urge to do anything/not work related on a computer if I'm out of the office. In fact I don't know any developers (maybe those under 30 and/or working less than 60 hrs/wk) who do. Now that I thought of that, maybe the people who "always want to have a tablet with them" are more in the range of entry level end users to sub power users, or 99% of the rest of the world. Probably/almost certianly got the numbers wrong, but thinking the point is good.

I'm an IT Director and I like my Surface. It's a good tool for forums, blogging, general communications as well as doing serious stuff at work. Using Remote Desktop, I can even work on my servers. That's what I like about it, it can do almost everything I need.

Great Comparison. I believe the surface is gaining serious market share, but it will be really hard for any tablet to ever overtake Apple. Honestly I prefer the surface over the Ipad, but still prefer android to everything.

It is not fair to compare surface with iPad. Surface is a real device that offers fun, productivity, and possibly replace the laptop. iPad is just a very very junior device that has killer looks.