OEMs can't compete with the Surface and that may be bad.

[PGHammer]

Exactly! 

Most Windows users aren't really believers in PORTABLE computers; otherwise, why the insistence on using portable computers for everything desktops are used for?

 

For most usages in terms of desktop computing, a portable is decidedly unsuitable (due to lack of capabilities in terms of CPU and/or GPU throughput).  My higher-end notebook supports Hyper-V (which my diesktop currently does not); however, with a two-item upgrade, the desktop gets Hyper-V AND can move further north in terms of leveraging it than my portable ever could.  Basically, the portable is capped; my desktop is not.

 

Windows users think desktop-first, if not desktop-ONLY, all too often.

 

Then there is my lowest-end notebook and my tablet - both are (to me) content-consumption devices.  THe tablet has the smaller-space advantage - and the non-need for a keyboard; however, the notebook has a larger screen AND said keyboard.  All too often, I'd take BOTH on the run, using each where it is suitable.  How many Windows users (in general) think that way?

[+LogicalApex MVC]

I've said it countless times so I will try to be brief in saying it again...

 

The Surface is a problem in that Microsoft won't clearly state what they are actually doing. As a result, they are really polluting the waters and choking out whatever market they are hoping to solidify in the tablet space. They are pretending to be MS of old, relying on the OEM model, while simultaneously pretending to be Apple, relying on the single source model. This isn't working and this can't work...

 

Outside of people who love Microsoft or are tied to them forcibly for one reason or another this confusion creates a market dynamic that is off putting for both the consumer and the OEM. If you're an OEM you're looking at competing with Microsoft directly which is a no win situation overall as Microsoft's brand will be front and center all over anything you make. As a result, you'll pump out the cheapest mess you can to scape by, but you'll hold off anything serious. This will lead consumers to assume Windows tablets are cheap crap and the Surface is overpriced and likely just as bad.

 

Microsoft needs to pick a side. Tuck itself on one side of its shorts; if you will. Either play the OEM game or play the single source game. If they truly want Surface to be a reference for OEMs then they should either partner with OEMs on a rolling schedule (aka Nexus) or they should build and ship reference devices only to OEMs (aka Nvidia). If they want the single source model then just stop allowing others to make Windows tablets.

 

But this isn't going to change. Microsoft can't seem to make a decent business decision as of late.

[Mockingbird]

 If they truly want Surface to be a reference for OEMs then they should either partner with OEMs on a rolling schedule (aka Nexus) or they should build and ship reference devices only to OEMs (aka Nvidia).

 

Something like that is definitely possible.

 

HP Spectre x360 was essentially designed by Microsoft.

 

Microsoft could ship the Surface to OEMs and say, I want you all to make something like this.

[chrisj1968]

OEM can't compete because most are too busy bundling crapware instead of putting some thought in design, drivers and software.

 

Toshiba and their padding their numbers, Toshiba surely puts power parts in their Qosmio gaming laptop line. This doesn't surprise me that MSFT is winning the tablet game. but shouldn't it anyway?

 

I think Win10 could help with desktop/laptop sales again.

[Mockingbird]

What I want to know is why there is no worthy imitation of the Surface.

 

Would Microsoft sue if HP makes a Surface clone? Probably not.

 

And no, the ENVY X2 doesn't count.