Where to Begin....Again

I have been away from this site for far too long and for the last month or so, I have stayed away because I had been away too long.  I simply do not know where to begin in getting back into putting down my thoughts on this blog.

One thing that has changed is my gadget status.  When I was last writing regularly, I was a gadget-starved gadget junkie.  I am a bit better fed now.

Microsoft Surface

This is the original version and the RT variety, not the Pro.  Quick review.  I love it, even though I do not use it as much as I thought I would.  With the addition of a TypeCover I can do virtually anything on it that I can do on the PC that I am presently typing this on.

Dell Venue 8 Pro

Now, the funny part is that my 8" Tablet runs full Windows 8, while my 10" Tablet runs RT.  I love this one as well.  I got the smaller tablet because I do not like to read on the larger one.  Also, I discovered that my phone, which is one of the biggest on the market isn't big enough for reading on.

On the subject of Windows RT versus Windows 8 is that it really does not make a difference.  I have no legacy programs that I use on my tablets, so the smaller tablet could have RT on it and I would not notice.

HTC One Max

This is the big phone, 5.9", which makes it larger than the Galaxy Note.  I love the real estate, but it has a few annoying things, like the change in the buttons, which is really annoying because you have to double tap the home button to get the running programs list.  It doesn't always work.  Overall, I really like it.

I still have my Hisense Sero 7 Pro, but it gives me problems from time to time and I do not use it much.

So, this is my first time back in a while, but I intend to write more often, so watch out.

Starting the New Year on the Surface

So, I have not been very good about writing here lately.  I am not sure that will change, but here I am again.

For my birthday, I bought myself a refurbished Microsoft Surface.  Yes, the one that runs Windows RT.  No, not the new Surface 2, but the original Surface.  I found a very good price on a refurbished Surface and I jumped on it when I had the money.

So, some of you may be wondering why I decided on the Windows tablet that may be doing least well of them all.  Well, that is why I am here writing today.

First, I reject completely the argument that Windows RT is bad because it does not run Windows legacy apps.  That is completely and utter balderdash.  No, I do indeed understand that Windows RT does not run Windows legacy apps.  What I reject is the idea that this is a mark against it.  Will Android run Windows apps?  No.  Well, is that a mark against it?  Does iOS run Windows apps?  No.  Does iOS run MacOS apps.  No.  Why is Windows RT judged differently from iOS and Android?  Windows RT is Microsoft's attempt to enter the low end tablet market.  Just like the tablets that it competes directly against, it does not run Windows or MacOS apps intended for desktop systems.  So, all three are even.

Windows RT only fails when compared to Windows 8 tablets, and that is understandable, except that with an ARM processor, it can have a much longer battery life, and a lighter weight.  I would put that as two in the plus column for Windows RT.

I have a new Windows 8 laptop that I am typing this on, so I do not really need a full Windows 8 tablet.  Though I must admit to being tempted by the Dell Venue 11 Pro, but at more than twice what I paid for my Surface, I was willing to sacrifice a few things I did not really need.

There are plenty of apps in the Microsoft Store.  I have installed Kindle, Netflix, and I already had a news, sports and mail app.  Once I updated to Windows RT 8.1, I was all set.  I also get Office, and I do not mean an Office clone, like you get on Android or iOS, I mean Office, the original and still the best.  I haven't installed many games, but that will come as I work my way through figuring out what I want.

One big thing for me was that I wanted a keyboard.  10"+ tablets are a little useless without one.  I had a 10" Android tablet and it screamed out to me constantly for a keyboard.  I ended up trying out three different ones.  Swype is nice, but it is really hard to do more than a few words.  By the way I prefer Swype to Swiftkey.  Swype is fine for stuff about the length of a text message.  I am sure it works great in Twitter...then again I do not use Twitter.  But, for longer emails, or writing something like this post...not so much.

The only other Windows tablet in my price range was the Asus T100, which is a great machine at a great price....with an unusable keyboard.  At least, it is unusable for someone with my big hands...or at least me with my big hands (no, you can't have them).  I have tried out both the TouchCover and the TypeCover at my local Microsoft store and surprise, I can use both of these.  They are actually full size keyboards.

I have a TypeCover that I hope will be arriving this week.

Most importantly, the price was right.  None of the other tablets I was looking at could match the price.  Oh, there were some lesser Android tablets, but the ones in the same price range are not ones I want.  The Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1, which would be my Android preference was twice the price.

So, I am starting off the new year on the Surface, and as the year progresses I will let you know what it is like to live with the Surface.

Windows, Positive Brand, or Liability?

Now, this post is not about the product. My question is about Windows as a brand. Obviously, Windows has strong brand recognition, dating at least back until 1985.

My question is...is Windows a positive brand or a liability?

It has been around a long time, but isn't Windows the OS that we all love to hate?  We use Windows, but do we love the brand?

People love Apple. They loved Steve Jobs. Some will deny it and claim that they just love the products, but millions trusted Jobs enough to buy an iPad without ever having held one or knowing what they were going to do with it. Jobs said it was magical and millions lined up to give him money for something unlike anything they had used before.

Does anyone have that sort of trust in Microsoft? Well, you certainly would not know it from the sales of the Surface. Microsoft built an incredible product. They paired that product with an innovative new OS. The fact that the pairing works I will judge from the fact that I have yet to meet a dissatisfied Surface owner. Unfortunately, that puts the Surface in the same company as the Zune HD. A product that owners loved, but where sales were not high enough to make it a going venture.

So why aren't people buying more Windows RT tablets, and specifically the Surface?

For the last 25 years there has been no truly viable alternative to Windows. Yea, yea, yea, I hear all you Linux and Apple fanboys, but if you have the brains you claim to have, then you know that neither has been a true alternative to Windows...for the average user. Apples were too expensive and the average user does not want to fiddle with Linux, and no matter what you say, Linux requires fiddling.

The average person wants something that just works, and that leaves Linux out of the equation. Apple would do very nicely in the "just works" category, but they are too expensive. That leaves Windows.

But, how many of those people would buy Apple if the price were the same? And why would they choose MacOS over Windows? Because it just works.  I know more people who are frustrated by Windows than are totally happy with it. Some would say that Windows is the OS we love to hate, but I have never felt the love. Windows is the OS we use...but hate.

So, is Windows a brand name that really helps sell PCs? Microsoft thinks so, but I don't. I think that setting Windows as the OS on the PC you are buying is about the same as seeing that your car runs on Goodyear tires. It's a brand name you know (and probably like more than Microsoft), but you don't choose between cars based on the brand of tires, and we don't buy a specific PC because it comes with Windows. It's what we expect.

Now lets get back to tablets. Microsoft designed a premium tablet, gave it a few more features than an iPad and priced it like an iPad...and it didn't sell. Why?

I think that most users, when presented with the question of iPad or Windows tablet, had no trouble choosing.  Windows never stood a chance.  The iPad just works.  Windows is the OS we use, but hate.  Microsoft did a terrible job of selling the virtues of Windows 8 to the public.  And then, Microsoft foolishly put the basic price at $100 more than the iPad.  Yes, you did get the very cool TouchCover, but again, Microsoft did not bother to push at users that you were paying more, but getting more.  iPad users have been proving that they do not need extra ports, and SD card slots, and yet Microsoft seemed to focus on these as the selling points of the product.

Microsoft runs ads that show off the cool sounds of the kickstand and the TouchCover.  iPad ads show how you use the product.  They often do not say anything at all, just music, and visuals of the cool things you can do with your iPad.

Yes, Microsoft has some disadvantages that it cannot completely control, like the number of apps for Windows RT, when compared to Android and iOS.  But I think they have a much bigger disadvantage, something that goes way beyond Microsoft making the wrong step at every stage of the marketing of Windows 8 and Surface (which runs Windows RT).  I can state that disadvantage in one word...

Windows

The OS we use, but hate.  The OS they make jokes about.  The #1 PC OS in the world, and I might even call it the best PC OS in the world, but also the OS with the worst brand reputation in the world.

Microsoft has not been doing too well of late, in the area of brand names.  First, they had to give up using the name Metro, for the UI common to Windows Phone, Windows RT and Windows 8.  Now, they appear to have lost the name SkyDrive for their cloud service.  They need to come up with a name to replace SkyDrive and they still need to find a true replacement for Metro.  Excuse me Microsoft, but the Modern UI is just lame.  But, I have one more suggestion, and maybe Microsoft can kill three birds with one stone.

Throw out Windows.

At least for Windows Phone and Windows RT.  Neither of them is Windows, because neither uses windows.  Please pay special attention to that lower case windows.  Windows was the OS named after it's main feature, the floating application windows on the screen.  You could open lots of them, and they could overlap.  They let you see into the application.  But Windows Phone has no windows.  The apps take up full screen.  There is only one window, the screen.  Windows RT should be the same way.  Microsoft needs to do away with the Desktop in Windows RT.  Office needs to move to the Modern UI.  All the control panel and system administration applets need to move to the Modern UI.  In Windows 8, the Desktop serves a purpose, legacy apps, but Windows RT does not run legacy apps, so there is no reason for the Desktop.  Because of the Desktop, Windows 8 still uses and needs to use windows, so it can retain the name.  Windows Phone and Windows RT don't need the desktop, so get rid of it.

I wish I had a good suggestion for what to call the new OS.  Everything I come up with I reject almost immediately.  Actually, I like Metro, but that is off the table.  Tiles would be appropriate, but I do not like the sound of it.  The new tiled UI appears on Windows 8, RT, Phone, and XBox, so it really is not the Windows UI anymore, and I think that Windows needs to go away, on everything but PCs.  Not the OS, just the name.

Change the name for any OS that does not run on an Intel processor PC.  Let Windows Phone and Windows RT soar, maybe they can reach as high as the XBox without the anchor that is Windows.  Microsoft needs to wipe the fog from their eyes and realize that the brand, Windows, is confusing their customers and pushing people away from their superb tablet.  Lose nearly thirty years of baggage and let the tablet OS, Windows RT, take over in the new mobile market.

A Shout Out to Staples

Lately, on the Tech Blogs, you hear about sales people at Best Buy, Office Depot and Staples trying to sell the Microsoft Surface and making a right bugger of it, as the English might say. Well, I want to give a shout out to Staples for having at least one person in the store who managed to hit all the high points about Microsoft Surface. I just wish that I had thought to get his name.

He saw me looking at the Surface and came up to see if I needed help. He asked if I knew anything about Windows 8, and I said I did, so he just talked about Surface. I thought he was going to make a mistake as he started by saying that the Surface ran Windows 8, and was just like the PCs with Windows 8, but then he fielded it cleanly by adding that it was the same, except that it would not run old Windows apps, then he showed me the Microsoft Store, and said that it would install any of these apps.

He mentioned that the Surface used an ARM processor. Now, I do not know about anyone else, but I have always just called it an “arm” processor, saying the word, but he spelled it out, saying that the Surface had an A.R.M processor. Sounded odd to me.

He pointed out the USB port, and the SD card slot, though actually he did not show me where it was. He showed that it could be used like a tablet, detached from the cover and even turned on its side in portrait mode. He also showed off the cable that will turn the mini display port on the Surface into either an HDMI port, or a VGA port. That he where he finally told me something I did not know, as I had not really looked at the peripherals for Surface.

He also showed me an ASUS and an Acer portable that had touch screens, and when I mentioned that I would like something with a little more graphics horsepower for games, he showed me an AMD processor portable with a better ATi card in it.
 
Over all, he was knowledgeable and personable and it was a rather pleasant experience…well, except for my not having the money to actually buy one.

To Windows 8 or not to Windows 8....

Windows RT: Worthless or the future of Windows?

 

So, this got me thinking.

 

25 January 2013

 

At the time I am writing this, only the opening statements of this debate have been posted, and so there isn't much to go on.

 

I believe that Windows 8 is the future...well, at least for the next two to three years. I do not think that Microsoft is going to do the same thing that they did with Windows XP and Windows Vista. Windows 8 is here to stay. I do not believe that Microsoft is going to rethink its strategy and make Windows 9 closer to Windows 7.

 

Why?

 

Because I think that Microsoft has recognized the trend of the future, fewer and fewer PCs and more and more mobile devices. They have a strong entry in the smartphone market. They dominate the PC market. What they need is an entry into the growing tablet market.

 

The strategy behind Windows 8 and it's sister OS Windows RT is two OSes, one UI. There are constant rumors that Apple is moving in the direction of making MacOS more like iOS, and this is sort of the same thing, except that since Microsoft already owns the PC market, they are working down into the tablet market, while Apple, who grew on the back of iOS in the smartphone market pushed iOS up into the tablet market.

 

Now, think about Microsoft's strategy, one UI to rule them all. This is the Modern (nee Metro) UI, which by the way is similar in appearance to the Windows Phone UI, which had the same name (Metro). You move from your PC to your tablet, and you do not change UI, nothing new to learn, and if you use Windows Live as your log in, all your settings are shared across both devices.

 

That is the future.

 

The problem is when I read the opening statements, I agree with most of what Matt Baxter-Reynolds says. He is right, there are several problems with Windows RT. The reliance on the Desktop Mode for Office is a mistake, and the same is true for the Control Panel, Windows Explorer, etc. These feel a little less like a problem in Windows 8, because there is feels like you are opening the hood and really getting into the engine compartment. That feels really clunky in Windows RT.

 

I wrote before that the success of Windows 8 depends on getting software vendors to write their PC Applications for the Modern UI. I still believe that. Keeping users away from the Desktop makes the experience of the OS much better, and having to go over and over again to the Desktop gives users the impression that the Modern UI is just a thin layer over the real OS. That is not good.

 

Matt Baxter-Reynolds also claims that Windows RT devices are too expensive. Now, this may or not be true, it depends on how you look at it. He points out that "Surface RT is prices around the average selling price of a normal Windows 8 laptop." Okay, I am sure he meant priced, and he is right, it is priced at exactly the same point as the iPad. Now, don't contradict me, the price of a Surface, without the TouchCover is $499, exactly the same as a 32GB iPad.

 

Then again, MB-R does not compare Surface to an iPad on price, which was a good, if deceptive idea on his part. It is priced higher than most Android tablets, but I feel that I can say with little chance of truly being proven wrong that the Surface is better than most Android tablets.

 

Most of the other Windows RT tablets I have seen are clinging to the same price range as the Surface, and that may need to change before Windows RT will really take off. People look at is and ask themselves....

 

Windows 8 portable, or Windows RT tablet?

 

Since the price is about the same, they may choose the more versatile PC. But the question is, do they ever ask themselves either of the following questions...

 

Windows 8 portable or iPad?

 

They are about the same price.

 

Windows RT tablet or iPad?

 

Now, here is the point where I think Microsoft can make some hay. As long as the question is Windows versus Windows, or portable PC versus iPad, I think that Windows RT loses. But, when people look just tablets, then I think Microsoft can make inroads. The real question is....

 

Windows RT tablet, iPad or Android tablet?

 

This is where Microsoft can win. Surface can hold its own against the iPad or any Android tablet, except for the two things usually mentioned, reliance on desktop mode, and lack of apps. I keep hearing price, but that shouldn't be an issue. Yes, as generally priced (with TouchCover) Surface is more, but you get more. You don't want the TouchCover, don't buy it.

The Post-PC Era

Once again, an article on Tech Republic got me thinking.

What's behind the slump in PC sales? Can the industry turn around?

Specifically, it was the following lines at the end of the article.

‘Between now and the next "crucial holiday buying season," it's imperative that PC makers who want to avoid that fate put together product lineups that aren't so, you know, PC-like.’

This got me to thinking about the whole concept of the PC, and what a post-PC era might be.

First, I didn’t buy the post-PC era BS when Steve Jobs said it, and I still don’t…well, maybe not.  PCs are not going anywhere.  We are going to be using PCs for the next several decades.  There is still a need for powerful desktop PCs. 

The problem is that most of us are learning that we don’t really need a PC for most of what we have done on a PC for the last couple of decades.  We really do not need PCs to surf the web, to check our email, check Facebook, watch a video or two.  Netflix and Hulu Plus are both available on tablets and smartphones (Hulu too, if you work at it).  Some tablets even have HDMI ports, so you can push it to your TV.  You can even do Word Processing on a tablet, if you add a keyboard. 

It is beyond these simple tasks where I start to see the weakness of my tablet, but I do not do them very often.  Picture editing is possible, but I find nothing to match Paint.net, which I have on my PC (it’s free).  But, as I said, I do not need Paint.net very often. 

I can easily imagine a future where there is one PC in my house.  Right now there are 4.  As a family, we have not made the switch to tablets.  My son likes PC games too much, and I am the only one with a tablet.  But, I can imagine each of us with our own tablet, and one PC for the things that require a PC.  I cannot yet imagine not having a PC at home.

The PC has dominated for the last two decades because of its versatility.  It could be anything.  It could be a lightweight portable for hauling across the country.  It could be a multimedia machine for listening to music, watching videos, even recording and producing them both.  It could be a graphics workstation, handling the largest pictures with ease.  It became our window to the internet, to email and webpages, to social networking and Wikipedia and all those other things.  For many, that window to the internet is really all a PC was…at home.  That job is being taken over by smartphones and tablets.

I quoted the end of the article above, but I am now going to quote the beginning.

“PCs are for work, tablets are for fun.”

And he quickly followed with…

“No one climbed on Santa's lap and asked for a new laptop. They wanted a Kindle or an iPad, or maybe even a cheap Android tablet, all of which cost less than a PC and are easier to wrap.”

Tablets were the hot gift of the season.  Now, it could be that tablets are just this season’s Tickle Me Elmo, but I don’t think so.  The momentum has shifted away from PCs towards tablets, but the real momentum is for the hearts and minds of users.  Lots of people still use PCs, but people don’t want PCs.  They may still need them, but that need is like how some people actually need Minivans.  They may need it, but it is not what they want, what they desire, what they dream about.

So, maybe we have entered the post-PC era.  The era when the PC slips from being an object of desire, like a sports car, and becomes the tool that we use because we need it, like the Minivan.

More Thoughts on Microsoft Surface

Microsoft Surface is one of the coolest concepts in the Tablet arena, and many questions have been raised, some legitimate, because Microsoft failed to mention any details about it.  So, we don't know the exact cost, the exact specifications, the battery life, or...much of anything. 

One thing that has some worried is that Microsoft is entering into the hardware business, in what should be direct competition with their partners.  Personally, I have a bit of faith in Microsoft.  After the successes of the XBox, Windows Phone 7, and Windows 7.  Some will point out that Windows Phone 7 has not been a huge sales success, but anyone who has used it knows that the OS is a success.  It is the best smartphone OS now, even including iOS 6, and only lacks the app ecosystem.  It is not the same sales success, but it is still better. 

The problem for Windows 8/RT should be obvious when you look at the available Windows 7 and Android tablets.  From the standpoint of hardware, they just don't measure up to the iPad.  The Transformer Prime is probably the best example of the lot, and it comes fairly close to the iPad, and it is priced accordingly.  Most just don't really come close to the iPad, but they do offer the advantage of price. 

Of course, Windows tablets do not offer the advantage of price.  Most of them cost hundreds more than an iPad.  Of course, you are getting a true computer, a PC and not just an iPod Touch with a larger screen.  Which leads to a quick (hopefully) aside. 

iPad fans will say that the iPad is much more than an iPod Touch with a larger screen.  They are wrong.  The internals of the iPad are the same as the iPhone, same processor, same graphics, same everything except the screen.  Now, I do not want to understate the importance of that larger screen.  Apps that are unusable on a 3.5" screen are wonderful on a 9" screen, but that really is the only difference. 

The true difference between the iPad is the variety of apps.  As I said, apps that would be unusable on an iPhone are wonderful on an iPad, but that has nothing to do with Apple.  Apple didn't create a better device, they just attached a bigger screen.  It is the developers who deserve the credit for making the iPad into something more than an iPod Touch with a larger screen.  Well, not really, because that is still what it is. 

Now, close the aside and back to Surface. 

Windows tablets today are PCs without keyboards.  Full PC processors, full I/O support and all the rest.  But, no matter what we look at, we see that the Windows tablets available today are trying very hard to compete against the iPad, and they fail, because they have less battery life,greater size and weight, overly long boot times, and an interface that is not designed for Touch.  Yes, Windows 7 is touch ready, it supports two finger gestures and most of the other cool touch features, but the parts of the UI are so small you cannot use them with your fingers in many cases.  But, the real point is that to stay close to the iPad in price, they have had to skimp on the hardware, and it shows. 

The takeaway from all this, is that Microsoft cannot rely on the OEMs to produce a top of the line tablet.  Even the best Android tablet on the market has admitted that it cannot go head to head against the iPad at the same price.  This is important, because Windows RT tablets are going to be Android tablets with a different OS.  You should be able to take the Asus Transformer Prime and flash it with Windows RT. 

That's for ARM tablets, but if we look at the Windows 7 tablets, it is the same story.  Too many compromises to stay close to the iPad in price.  Just recently, we have see a few Windows 7 tablets that have attempted to do it right, the Asus EeeSlate, Samsung Slate, and the Dell Latitude ST.  Overall, these look quite good, and they are priced well above the iPad, but they still don't quite measure up. 

What Microsoft needed was a flagship.  The Windows equivalent of the Google Nexus.  Something that shows just exactly what you can do with Windows 8/RT, and I believe that Microsoft did not have enough faith in any of its OEM partners to leave that job up to them. 

When I remember that there were rumors over a year ago that Microsoft was thinking of crossing over into hardware for tablets, it makes me wonder if Microsoft didn't pull aside one or more of their partners to ask them to produce a flagship tablet.  If Microsoft didn't point out to Dell or HP for example that they needed a flagship tablet.  I am also wondering if Dell and HP didn't turn them down.   

HP already has the Windows Slate disaster standing against them.  Steve Ballmer must have felt like an idiot, when HP dropped the Slate after acquiring Palm.  Steve Ballmer made the HP Slate a centerpiece of his presentation, and then HP dropped it.  That must have seemed like a real stab in the back.  Dell has never done a Windows tablet until now, and if the Latitude St is the best Dell could do, then I can understand Microsoft leaving them behind. 

Microsoft needs a flagship tablet for Windows 8/RT, and no other partner was big enough to make it.  Especially for the Windows 8 tablet, they needed a big PC OEM and that really means either HP or Dell.  With them out of the running, Microsoft has only one choice, make it themselves.  And so, we have Surface. 

Microsoft said that Surface will have a price comparable to other tablets, and Surface Pro comparable to ultrabooks.  Let's rephrase that.  Surface will have a price that matches the iPad.  Surface Pro will have a price that comparable to the low to middle range of the ultrabooks, maybe even higher. 

This is the flagship.  The is the pinnacle.  Surface is a match for the iPad, at least in my opinion.  Give a choice between an iPad and Surface, I would not hesitate in choosing Surface.  Surface will be a premium tablet, both RT and Pro.  Every OEM will be able to produce a tablet and sell if for less than Surface, and that is the idea.  Microsoft will take the high road, up where the iPad is, where the real risk is.  No other tablet has succeeded in that price range.  OEMs will be able to produce lesser tablets and sell them at a lower price. 

I think that these lower priced tablets will be critical to the success of Windows 8/RT.  I am not sure that Windows RT can beat the iPad if Surface is the only player.  Microsoft needs a lower priced entry point for Windows RT.  Surface Pro and Windows 8 should be a different story.  Yes, they will be competing with the iPad, but they are clearly going to cost more, but when you compare the full computing power of Windows 8, I think you will have a compelling alternative to iPad, Android and even Windows RT. 

So, I hope that I have given a few extra points to consider.  Unlike some, I don't think that Microsoft threw its OEM partners under the bus.  I doubt that this was a big surprise to them.  I think they knew this was coming, and they will be scrambling to fill in underneath Surface, and to provide other innovative solutions, like the ones we saw at Computex recently.  I think that HP and Dell might have been given a chance to produce something like Surface and been refused.  Though I also think it is possible that Steve Ballmer did not make the offer to HP after the Slate embarassment. 

One final aside.  There is a rumor that Windows RT is going to cost $85 a copy.  So far as I know, this was a single rumor, unconfirmed that has been repeated so often by the Tech Media that they all believe it now.  I don't buy it.  What I see if a bunch of anti-MS tech writers (which is most of them) trotting out tired reasons why Microsoft will fail without making any attempt to verify the rumor.  They want Microsoft to fail, and so they repeat any rumor that makes it look like Microsoft is full of idiots. 

A price tag that high would cripple sales of Windows RT tablets.  Windows RT tablets will be competing directly against Android tablets and they do not do enough more to justify paying nearly $100 more for Windows RT.  Remember, the hardware is the same, therefore the cost is the same.  With the already tiny margins in the tablet field (outside of iPad), you cannot expect OEMs to take $85 less on each sale, and if you price them $85 more than an identically specced Android tablet, then they simply won't sell. 

I don't believe that Surface is Microsoft's attempt to push the OEMs out of the way and take over completely whatever market there may be for Windows tablets.  I believe that Microsoft wanted a no compromise flagship tablet that would stand up to direct comparison to the iPad, and I believe that Microsoft decided that the only way to get it was to make it themselves. 

Below is the chart of the prices of iPad and all the top Android tablets that I could find.  Where ever possible, I pulled prices from the manufacturers website.  I was not looking to find the lowest available price, but the manufacturer's suggested retail price. 

	8GB	16GB	32GB	64GB
iPad		$499	$599	$699
Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1		$499	$599
Galaxy Tab 2		$399
Acer Iconia A200	$329	$349
Acer Iconia A500		$349
Acer Iconia A700			$449
Asus EeePad Transformer TF101		$377	$599
Asus EeePad Transformer TF300			$384
Asus Transformer Prime		$379	$499	$599
Sony		$399	$499
Toshiba Thrive	$379	$399	$479
Toshiba Excite		$449	$529	$649
Toshiba Excite LE		$529	$599
Motorola Xoom		$499
Motorola Xyboard		$499
Lenovo IdeaPad S	$399	$449	$499
Lenovo ThinkPad Tablet		$499	$569	$669