I dont know about the current model, but on my first generation iPad I sometimes notice the fact that it's RAM constrained to the point that apps are force-quit or Safari has trouble keeping even a single web page in its cache. It would definitely be advantageous for it to have more memory. Admittedly this was less of a deal on prior versions of iOS and, if I remember correctly, this model originally didn't even have support for multitasking, so memory requirements were naturally lower.
That could also be attributed to a slower CPU. But yeah, iOS has had a lot of junk added over the years which is mostly optimized for the newer processors and memory, whereas the older models are mostly an afterthought.
Considering not everyone needs internet wherever they are, and a lot do not have unlimited data plans, then the comparison is fine. You can also ad on to the Surface from the phone company and have mobile data wherever you go since the Surface has connectivity that the new iPad does not....like USB. So since the iPad doesnt have USB, then using your guidelines, I still cannot compare them.
Competing products will not always have the same features and will not always be able to do the same thing. Companies produce something that the competition does not have to entice users to buy their products. IF all products must have the same features in order to be compared, then you cannot really compare any products out there since they are all a little different...different hardware/software.
All I was saying was what is the point of comparing the more expensive cellular model to the Pro, which doesn't have that expensive add-on? Why not compare it to the normal $800 model? It just sounded like you compared those 2 for the sake or price and nothing else. Is there even any proof that a Pro will be able to be used with a cellular provider? I haven't seen anything regarding that, so I'm asking that as a genuine question.