Surface 3 - New direction, higher prices and crappy i3

[Iggy]

You are getting far too hung up on the fact it has a i3 in it. Lots of laptops come with i3 in that, for day to day stuff, is perfectly fine. A business looking to replace a fleet of aging laptops will not go "oh the i5 is so much more powerful lets get that!" they will look at the cost and go for the cheapest option. Especially if they have no need for i5 speeds.
 
You are hardly likely to hand a i5 or i7 powered computer to someone that is only going to be running powerpoint or wordprocessing. It is pointless.
 
Also do your math. $799 from $999 is not $100. Try $200.

Um, I can buy an i3 laptop for $300, so I want this why?

Maybe with an AMD processor and a better integrated GPU...

After all, I may not want big cpu power, but what about decent gaming capability?

[Iggy]

Completely different beast, Iggy.  It's not being made nor marketed for those wanting a $300 laptop, nor is it marketed towards gamers and gaming.

They are going for the enterprise market and driving the Surface 3 machines as laptop replacements to engineers, doctors, IT people, etc.

Funny, but I don't see those people using tablets, and this offers few advantages over a laptop.
So, do you really think engineers, doctors, and IT people WANT a device like this?
I know people in all three fields, and I think I'd have a hard time selling them this device (and having previously sold electronics, I'm pretty sure of this).

[Iggy]

http://www.macworld.com/product/586734/21-5-inch-core-i3-imac-3-06ghz.html

Exact model I have, still works just fine for the minimal amount I use it.

I've been wondering who still bought iMacs.
There must be a market for these, but I didn't understand it when the iMacs were introduced and I still don't get it.

[Iggy]

Actually several systems at the hospital I work at are getting the tablet treatment. So yes there will be doctors, nurses and support staff running around with tablets and mobile devices. Several execs already have tablets and a couple have a Surface. And I know lots of people in the IT industry myself and nearly all have a tablet that they use in conjuntion with a laptop. So yes, Microsoft (if marketed right) have potential to make strides into the Corporate sector with these things.
 

At one of our local area hospitals (the one my parents trained at to be specific) only the dietary staff use tablets.
I have friends in IT too, and few of them are embracing the devices (and using them with a laptop seems redundant).
And the market where tablets are most popular, with young people and novice users, seems pretty far removed from the enterprise market you envision.

While the advantages of compact size and portability are obvious, I can't see this device doing more than displacing a small percentage of the other alternatives.

[Iggy]

@CritAnime

The argument against COWS is valid, no one likes them here either.
The disturbing part is our local hospitals even mount laptops on carts.
Fairly stupid, but...

And tablets with Windows do make sense from a unified software point of view.

While I can tolerate Android and Linux (and actually strongly dislike the Win8 interface), the advantages of that OS seem apparent.

And I'm not sure how iMacs got dragged into this as they aren't even comparable to these new convertible tablets.

[Iggy]

All of you sounds SO full of crap.

First, all 64 bit cpus are more than powerful enough.
I can't really tell the performance differences between an Apple G5, an i3, or my AMD cpus - and I don't need 8 cores or an i7.

Second, desktops remain a completely viable form factor - heck I'm pricing new components right now.

Third, screw the minor differences, all modern OS' are virtually interchangeable.

Fourth - I don't CARE if you like Apple products, they cost too much without offering enough additional value.

Fifth (and finally) - If you don't think our current PPC offerings are powerful enough, you have tried an NG OS on an X1000 or G5.

[Iggy]

I have I3 sandy bridge 3.30 ghz. (I might upgrade it to I5 Ivy bridge in Aug but I don't know yet.)This old computer has saved me. My AMD computer died.  The hard drive died. I guess I use whatever I can get by.

Yes, that was the core point I was trying to get across.
It all rather interchangeable these days.
If its fast enough and powerful enough, do I really care what its running on or what OS it uses?

Although, Microsoft and Intel ARE evil (Any company with a dominant market share tends to be).

[Iggy]

...Amazing how many people still connect a mouse and keyboard to their laptops when they really want to get something done.

:rtfm: Actually, I put up with the keyboard, but I still use a mouse.

And I have laptops, netbooks, AND tablets and I still have desktops (btw - you forgot - "cell phones will replace everything" - Ha!)

[Iggy]

And memory and graphics cards are also important, an i3 with a reasonable amount of ram (say 16 to 24 GB) and a GB or two graphics memory on a good card will perform better than an i5 starved on 4 or 8 GB of RAM and a cheap 512 Mb graphics card.

OMFG - The use of those two words "reasonable" and "starved" is just cracking me up.
The ever increasing spiral of hardware demands continue while nothing has really improved in far too long.

[Iggy]

Real hardcore gamers use whatever let's them run the games they want properly.

Thank you.
That was a fairly ridiculous comment.
Apparently the poster believes you need to perpetually over spend on hardware in order to be a "real hardcore gamer".
What a geek.

[Iggy]

There's a big difference in a casual gamer and a hardcore gamer.

Yes, one spends far too much money to play games (at a high resolution) that are hard to distinguish from games previously released.
And then feel good about the expenditure.
While I appreciate your attempt to calm those you think you've offended, perhaps you haven't considered HOW you have offended some of them.

Mind you, its your business how you spend your money.
But you still sound foolish.

[Iggy]

Me, I like my gaming experience like this - you may differ.

Obviously.
And I don't think you really could offend me.
I just don't share your enthusiasm for hardware that rapidly becomes obsolete.

As to your favored pastime, its your life.

A casual observation, we are way off topic.
Not that the Surface 3 is interesting enough to have sustained my attention.

The discussion on the merits of various cpus does though.
And the i7 holds a very threadbare performance edge that is hard to economically justify.

[Iggy]

Didn't say it couldn't pack a lot of punch, and I'm sure such a system is great for the vast, vast majority of people.

For what I require out of a gaming PC, it wouldn't cut the mustard by a long shot, is all.

Out of curiosity, what i7 do you employ?

[Iggy]

Maybe it was a Windows 8 thing but the two i3 systems  I tried we're slow as f*ck and unresponsive sonetimes.

Lack of cores will do that.

[Iggy]

Hey Iggy,

In this machine, which is actually an older gaming PC from a few years ago - an i7 2600K, 32 GB RAM, nVidia 590.  My main gaming machine has a 4930K oc'ed a wee bit, 32 GB RAM, and 2 Titan cards.  Original Titan cards, not the new Titan Black.  Both run SSD's, this machine having a 240 GB OCZ for the boot drive and a standard SATA 1 TB drive for media, and the other more powerful machine has a 1 TB Samsung SSD solely.  Those drives were on sale recently for $460 so I had to snap one up, been real happy with it thus far.

The 4930 runs a bit hot for my tastes and I should have water cooled it from the start, but the Zalman cooler I have on it keeps it within range.

Nice cpu, but I don't understand why you are not water cooling.
At 130 watts, those do run hot, AND they are expensive.
Better cooling would increase the lifespan of the processor.
And, since you've spent a lot of money, an extra $100 or so seems like a minor outlay.

Also for less threaded tasks, the 4.8 GHz i5 might give you a run for your money at a fraction of the price.

Personally I would have forgone the SSDs and set up 4 disk RAID arrays (I don't trust storage media).