Is the Surface too expensive?

[NickA]

Surface isn't for everyone.

If you'd rather work with Google Docs, have fun with that.

MS doesn't need to be in a position of fear. They have a great product. It is priced competetively for what it brings.

^^ This. There is no fear of Apple anymore. The Surface RT is a well built contender. It's not your run of the mill low end Android tablet. To me, this is the first real choice for a tablet other than an iPad. The marketing looks good so far, and most reviews are on the positive side.

It is for sure not the tablet for everyone; and that's the directions things are going now. Take BlackBerry for example; they know BB 10 is not for everyone, and it's not going to outsell the iPhone, so why even try? They are making a good product designed for the consumer they want to reach.

Microsoft is on a mission to succeed, and it's obvious that they aren't backing down. Especially with the comments about them making their own phone if needed. They are taking control of their own destiny, and that's never a bad thing in any situation.

 

[kane4fire]

LOL, no fear of Apple anymore. They sold 3 million iPad's in a weekend, which is just slightly less than what analysts say Microsoft will sell of the Surface by the end of the year.

Also considering that profit margins for the Surface are greater than the iPad, yes it's definitely too expensive. The Surface comes in at $266 with the touch cover to make, and selling for $600. The iPad 3 came in at $316 and selling for $499. No matter what side of the fence you're on, that huge of a mark-up is what anyone would call "over-priced".

 

[Coreldan]

LOL, no fear of Apple anymore. They sold 3 million iPad's in a weekend, which is just slightly less than what analysts say Microsoft will sell of the Surface by the end of the year.

Also considering that profit margins for the Surface are greater than the iPad, yes it's definitely too expensive. The Surface comes in at $266 with the touch cover to make, and selling for $600. The iPad 3 came in at $316 and selling for $499. No matter what side of the fence you're on, that huge of a mark-up is what anyone would call "over-priced".

I still don't think that the value of the touch cover and Office 2013 can be ignored.

I doesnt matter even if your made up percentage of students manage with google docs, the Office 2013 is still worth a 100$ and you get it with the device. I for one never had any interest in tablets until Surface, simply cos they would've been nothing but consumption devices for me, while I needed productivity too. Sure, there are all kinds of monstrous cases and what not for the iPad and weird transformers with awkward keyboard docks, but neither is what I wanted. For me Surface hit the sweet spot in design solutions, productivity and also being a tablet for entertainment purposes. I didn't even blink paying 600? for that, cos as it is there are no alternatives that I could really consider buying.

I must be one of those 0,01% of students you mentioned earlier that do need a full Office, Google docs sadly doesnt have nearly enough configurations for any university essay that requires you to use the "official formating".

 

[NickA]

LOL, no fear of Apple anymore. They sold 3 million iPad's in a weekend, which is just slightly less than what analysts say Microsoft will sell of the Surface by the end of the year.

Also considering that profit margins for the Surface are greater than the iPad, yes it's definitely too expensive. The Surface comes in at $266 with the touch cover to make, and selling for $600. The iPad 3 came in at $316 and selling for $499. No matter what side of the fence you're on, that huge of a mark-up is what anyone would call "over-priced".

You can't just look at the price of parts when determining the profit margin. They just don't total up the parts, and say "lets sell it for xx amount". Other factors play into price. And the real profit comes from memory. Do you think Apple really pays 100 bucks for an extra 16GB of memory?

Yeah, no one fears Apple. You don't see trends? How much longer do you see Apple being on top? Who own the smartphone market now, is it Apple with the biggest share? Keep in mind, this isn't a 199.00 Nexus 7. Microsoft is not trying to undercut Apple like competitors do, they are taking them on with a product that's better, not cheaper.

 

[kane4fire]

I must be one of those 0,01% of students you mentioned earlier that do need a full Office, Google docs sadly doesnt have nearly enough configurations for any university essay that requires you to use the "official formating".

You can do MLA formatting, double/single spacing, etc that Universities require on Google Doc's. You can even do formula's in the spreadsheet. The surface has a limited version of Office that doesn't have the ability to do macro's which I wish it did, but I can adapt.

I think the touch-pad is truly amazing since they mated it with the surface from concept. That still doesn't make it too expensive for breaking into a market that is completely and utterly dominated by Apple.

You're getting my motive wrong, I want the Surface to succeed, I don't care about justifying your purchase or mine. I bought it, and love it more than any other tablet I've owned. As useful it is to me, I know it's not useful enough to the majority of people at the price it's being sold. Looking at the margin that MSFT is making, that leaves me only scratching my head as to why they did price it so high because at this point, some sacrifices need to be made. If they were going to have the margin's they did, they should've slapped in a more powerful processor.

Pricing it lower would've sold more units, which would have driven dev's to populate the store quicker. Then other OEM's could have came in with better devices and actually made some money. I know that x86 devices and apps will be made and sold without problem, but I want stuff for Windows RT.

 

[NickA]

Pricing it lower would've sold more units, which would have driven dev's to populate the store quicker. Then other OEM's could have came in with better devices and actually made some money.

Pricing the device lower has nothing to do with developers getting on board. See BB PlayBook. They are still struggling to get developers to create apps, even going so far as a guarantee that developers will make 10k, or they (BB) will pay the difference.

Again, you don't need to price a tablet lower to compete with Apple. You just need to make a better product that people want. Actually, you just need to make them think they want it, you know, like Apple does

 

[11B1P]

I think it should have started out $100 lower. I make a decent annual income, but I'm still hesitant on making the purchase. $600 is alot to swallow for me. I want one greatly but I'm just too hesitant right now.

 

[kane4fire]

Pricing the device lower has nothing to do with developers getting on board. See BB PlayBook. They are still struggling to get developers to create apps, even going so far as a guarantee that developers will make 10k, or they (BB) will pay the difference.

The BB playbook isn't being developed for because people fear BB going under and also not selling. Windows 8 will not go under - nor will it undersell, but windows RT will have a tough time. How many people are holding out for the Pro because they can't install a program or two? Even with the fact they have to purchase and install Office separately!

This device is emerging into a world where it's not the dominant device, and other than the people who were going to buy it regardless if it was $200 or $1000, that little price difference has made a lot of them hesitate. Especially with the fact that people developed an expectation of the price to be at least $100 less before it launched, and now they feel let down.

Basically, the moral of the story is Balmer shouldn't have said anything regards to the price (didn't he give a range starting at $300?) and just let the speculation keep building the whole time. But since he did, it should've been $100 less.

 

[Reflexx]

The fact that Surface isn't sold in big box stores or on Amazon should already tell you that MS isn't trying to outsell Apple with Surface. Availability is limited for a reason.

So quoting Apple's sales numbers font mean much. They're not trying to beat Apple with Surface.

The main product really is Windows 8. Surface is just their way of showing it off.

 

[Marute]

I agree on the value of Office. For me, it made the difference. I've never owned a tablet because I never saw the use for one, really. But with Office, I can actually use it for something else than fun and games. I want to use Word to write, not Google Docs or different note taking apps.

The only reason why I am not getting a Surface RT is that it is my last year in school. I don't want to get one now just to use for a couple of months of school. Then rather wait a bit and see if the price drops or what the future of tech brings.

 

[andrewkim789]

It's just a little bit overpriced for me, but the price probably is high because of how much they need to spend to build the thing

 

[welsbloke]

I do not believe it to be overpriced when you think about the market it is going for. When I look at the iSupply breakdown however it is overpriced in so much as Microsoft make significant margin and could cut $100 off the price and still compete with Apple on margin.



I think this is a strategy though introducing at the higher price and release that margin to gain sales when needed. Currently with the number of regions sold out or out of stock I would suggest the current pricing is spot on.



Also the Xbox 360 has taught them a thing or two about pricing. They have done an excellent job at holding the pricing against what many consider a superior product in the PlayStation and it is the PlayStation that is competing on margin. Now this obviously is not the case with Apple but the recent news that the Tablet market share is eroding with the Kindle/Nook/Nexus releases and what looks like strong sales of the Surface things are not so rosie in the Apple walled garden as they once where.

 

[crystal_planet]

LOL, no fear of Apple anymore. They sold 3 million iPad's in a weekend, which is just slightly less than what analysts say Microsoft will sell of the Surface by the end of the year.

Also considering that profit margins for the Surface are greater than the iPad, yes it's definitely too expensive. The Surface comes in at $266 with the touch cover to make, and selling for $600. The iPad 3 came in at $316 and selling for $499. No matter what side of the fence you're on, that huge of a mark-up is what anyone would call "over-priced".

Give me a freaking break.

First, that's how apple rolls-go nuts over the first week and trickle off after that. How were the sales of the iPad4 btw? Because that is more of a comparable product.

Second, apple could sell poop on a shingle and there would be people lined up to buy it.

I don't think Apple is worried either, but if you think they haven't taken notice of the surface's sales pace, you're kinda dumb. I doubt the industry on the whole imagined the Microsoft offering to be selling as well as it has.

 

[emigrating]

The BB playbook isn't being developed for because people fear BB going under and also not selling. Windows 8 will not go under - nor will it undersell, but windows RT will have a tough time. How many people are holding out for the Pro because they can't install a program or two? Even with the fact they have to purchase and install Office separately!

This device is emerging into a world where it's not the dominant device, and other than the people who were going to buy it regardless if it was $200 or $1000, that little price difference has made a lot of them hesitate. Especially with the fact that people developed an expectation of the price to be at least $100 less before it launched, and now they feel let down.

Basically, the moral of the story is Balmer shouldn't have said anything regards to the price (didn't he give a range starting at $300?) and just let the speculation keep building the whole time. But since he did, it should've been $100 less.

Probably not as many as you initially think. Yes, enterprise users will, likely, hold out for the Pro (or any Intel based Win8 tablet/hybrid TBH). Consumers, i.e. your sister, cousin or friend probably will not - they, in almost all cases, don't need legacy support and the Surface RT can easily replace the need of a laptop or desktop computer for the masses. You've got Office, a Web Browser and there's a [small but steadily growing] app store - anything else is fluff.

Even I, as a power user, does not want the a Pro. During the "launch" many months ago I thought I did, but I have since realized that I don't. I've been using an iPad, Kindle Fire and Asus Transformer for a while now and since I started doing so the use of my laptop is almost nonexistent, I will pick it up for the odd webpage, document or to transfer photos off my DSLR but that's it. The Surface RT remedies all of this by providing a full web experience, a "proper" office suite and standard USB port. If I need to do any heavier lifting than that I will either RDP into one of my actual computers or mosey my fat *** over to my desk.

While I agree, the price is a little higher than I had anticipated, it's still in the iPad's price range and anyone who is contemplating getting an iPad will, with the right marketing, also check out the Surface RT (or other Windows RT based tablets). Consumers don't know that Ballmer gave a price range, all they know is that it's within their grasp pricewise.

 

[ken800]

I agree with it being overpriced and think that they should have priced the RT at $499 AND included the keyboard in that price. They could charge the extra $20 for a type cover. I don't believe they should have offered it without. The whole point of the keyboard on the Surface is to bridge the gap between tablet and desktop. It's advertised that way (ads show the keyboard) and I think it would have served them better to make certain that EVERY surface had a keyboard. It truly is impossible to REALLY get the surface experience without one... Essentially $100 overpriced IMO. I returned mine as, at the price point, I expected it to be nearly perfect in execution. Too much lag and bugginess in the 1.0.

I sold my iPad to get a surface so I'm now without a tablet. I'm going to sit on the sidelines and hopefully see SP1 windows 8 soon and a device with just a little more horsepower for a competitive price.

If the rumor mill doesn't contain something by year's end, I'll figure out plan B, but I'm not giving up on the Windows 8 ecosystem yet.

 

[zipro]

I understand and agree that a Surface RT for $200 was unrealistic, but isn't $500 for the RT (not the pro) without a cover and with only 32GB a bit pricy?

I think it is compared to the iPad - for two reasons:

- The 32gb version is closer to the 16gb iPad when it comes to how much storage can actually be access by the consumer

- The screen resolution really is an issue. I know that many people seem to ignore it or find it less problematic than me. But the fact remains: if you work on a Retina Macbook Pro or switched from an iPad, the pixelation isn't something you're going to want to live with. I sold mine for this sole reason. I loved Windows 8, I found the apps I needed, but reading on it just wasn't nice. It wasn't that bad for all fonts, btw. Somehow, the font-smoothing thing worked better for some fonts than for others. I found the Mail App to be absolutely disgusting, while web pages generally looked great.

Anyway, given the fact that from the 32gb of storage 1/3 is eaten by the OS and that the screen resolution is way too low, I think it's too expensive.

 

[KingCrimson]

I think it is compared to the iPad - for two reasons:

- The 32gb version is closer to the 16gb iPad when it comes to how much storage can actually be access by the consumer

- The screen resolution really is an issue. I know that many people seem to ignore it or find it less problematic than me. But the fact remains: if you work on a Retina Macbook Pro or switched from an iPad, the pixelation isn't something you're going to want to live with. I sold mine for this sole reason. I loved Windows 8, I found the apps I needed, but reading on it just wasn't nice. It wasn't that bad for all fonts, btw. Somehow, the font-smoothing thing worked better for some fonts than for others. I found the Mail App to be absolutely disgusting, while web pages generally looked great.

Anyway, given the fact that from the 32gb of storage 1/3 is eaten by the OS and that the screen resolution is way too low, I think it's too expensive.

#1 - The lie about it being 32GB when it's really 16GB.
#2 - The resolution is no good in a glut of retina displays
#3 - The stock apps are in a **** state right now

 

[shn'g]

#1 - The lie about it being 32GB when it's really 16GB.
#2 - The resolution is no good in a glut of retina displays
#3 - The stock apps are in a **** state right now

#1 lie? sorry but I kind of figured this when I saw the windows logo. windows does eat up a lot of space... so you are still getting 16GB for the same price as ipad which is what around 14GB or less?

#2 I agree with you on this one... compared to other resolutions it is low, but this is in a world were we are absolutely obsessed with resolution. Which is fine, but also a little bit much. I have a 42" 720p plasma tv and think it looks great. the surface has a 10.6" display with basically same resolution as my tv. I'm fine with it, as others will be and are.

#3 yeah def... but its store is in better shape than a lot of beginner OS's. Can't really judge this right now on basis of value for money. Give it a few months and if there is no improvement than yeah its a basis for complaint.

 

[zipro]

#1 lie? sorry but I kind of figured this when I saw the windows logo. windows does eat up a lot of space... so you are still getting 16GB for the same price as ipad which is what around 14GB or less?

#2 I agree with you on this one... compared to other resolutions it is low, but this is in a world were we are absolutely obsessed with resolution. Which is fine, but also a little bit much. I have a 42" 720p plasma tv and think it looks great. the surface has a 10.6" display with basically same resolution as my tv. I'm fine with it, as others will be and are.

#3 yeah def... but its store is in better shape than a lot of beginner OS's. Can't really judge this right now on basis of value for money. Give it a few months and if there is no improvement than yeah its a basis for complaint.

#1: maybe in the US. Here, the entry-level surface (without touch cover) costs 579 Fr. while the 16gb iPad (4th gen) is 550.

#2: With the difference that you sit 10 feet away from your plasma and keep your Surface at maybe 15 inches. There's no other way of putting it: the 1366x768 res is a shame. It doesn't need to have a 230ppi pixel density - anything above 170 or so looks pretty good. But 145 is not enough.

 

[Coreldan]

It all depends. I have zero complaints about the resolution of the Surface. My main desktop display has less PPI than that. I've never really used iPads for longer than few minutes so I don't have the "better screen" to compare to. I bet I could see the difference if put next to each other, but as it is there's nothing I can complain about on the Surface screen.