Nevermind the fact that Surface was previously a giant multitouch display/table thing that Microsoft and Samsung were selling… (the new PixelSense name for that product kind of sucks though, I have to say). The pair of Surface tablets that Microsoft announced yesterday are probably their best entry into this market so far. And while I can’t say I’m a huge fan of Windows 8 right now (having only tried the developer beta or whatever version came out a couple months back) I can say that would be interested in at least trying the Metro UI on a tablet device at some point. It makes FAR more sense in that environment.

I see a few “issues” with this product announcement though. First of all, that’s all it was… an announcement. “Hey, we’re going to start making these things.” And that’s kind of it. I’d be willing to bet something in saying that Microsoft only wanted to get this thing into the media prior to Google I/O kicking off next week (where Google is expected to announce its own “Nexus” tablet of some sort).

There are not many specific specs - which obviously are going to be changing somewhat as they near the actual product launch in a few months. There’s no battery life numbers. Again… lots of time to improve/tweak that. And possibly the most important part… there are no prices. Just random references to other products on the market.

And let’s not forget that there are actually two very different products here. The Surface RT device is basically the iPad competitor of the pair. The specs we know so far are on par with what the current competition is offering and I would expect it to be priced as such. If they can’t match the $500 price point here with the RT, they’ve already lost. And IMO, they should be shooting for less if they want to penetrate this market at all.

The “Surface for Windows 8 Pro” version, aside from having a stupid name, is basically a very slim PC that doesn’t fold up (hence the pricing reference to Ultrabooks). Though the fancy keyboard covers are pretty neat. Think of this one as a dockable tablet that is (should be?) a fully functioning PC. I’d expect pricing of this one to be $800+ given the Ultrabook comparison. However… if they market the Pro version as a tablet, it will fail.

Regular consumers looking for a portable device similar to the iPad that everyone knows about are not going to consider an $800+ tablet that’s bigger and heavier (the Pro model is larger and heavier than an iPad) and significantly more expensive than the iPad (or other Android device) regardless of what kind of crazy specs it has.

That’s what the RT model is for. Market the shit out of that thing as a tablet to the average consumer. They’ll need to be a bit more specific and direct with the Pro version. This device is for people who want the usability of a touch device and the portability of a laptop with the full function of a PC and Windows applications. I feel like this is a pretty limited group of people.

I’m sure there are many of them out there – but I feel like Microsoft needs to be very careful in how they push this thing. Of course all of this could be completely irrelevant in another week after Google announces whatever they’re working on. But we have no idea what that really will be yet.

And if not then, it could be irrelevant in 3-4 months when this Surface device actually hits the stores and everyone has forgotten about it… The only thing people are going  to be doing now is asking questions – which while usually a good thing to generate interest, if there are no answers to those questions, that interest will start to fall off. Quickly.

Windows XP Display Properties. Suck. Hard.

Ever try to control multiple displays or extended desktop with Windows? It is absolutely awful. Really is torturous. Funny part is that it LOOKS like it should be easy and consistent. Of course we all know looks can be are deceiving.

So if you have two displays connected to a Windows system, you can go to the Display Properties and set one of them up to be extended. That usually works… usually. Even that can be a bit painful at times. Occasionally it just won’t output to the second monitor. I don’t know why or how… but it decides.

There’s also the um… transition direction between the two monitors. I’m not sure what it is actually called, but it is the direction the mouse goes to get to the other screen. You should be able to just drag and drop the monitors around in the Properties to get it to work. This is usually consistent enough… but it is returning to this state that is the problem – especially with a laptop. Good luck undocking a laptop and coming back to the dock and having everything work the way you originally set it.

Thankfully people like Intel have developed their own utilities to work with their hardware that make these things easier to control. Intel in particular makes a few nice features like this – specifically their Schemes. They work. Every time. Nvidia’s control panel is close… but not as user friendly. Looks pretty confusing – even on the Standard Settings option. Advanced actually doesn’t seem to change much of anything though.

So yes… Microsoft’s monitor management in XP is terrible. Even though I’ve used Vista and Windows 7, I haven’t tried anything with multiple monitors or extended desktop with either one yet.

Here’s to hoping they suck less.

What now? Well as some of you may or may not know, there is currently a beta of Windows 7 floating around. I was finally able to get a key from the Microsoft site and just downloaded the beta from one of my “usual” sites, so it’s still legit.

Trouble is that I didn’t want to disrupt the current “OK-ness” of my Vista desktop. It has been fairly stable lately and I don’t want to really mess around with that. So what does that leave me to do?

Install it on my Macbook, of course!

If you didn’t know… any Apple computer (as of… well, not long ago) can also run Windows along with OS X (it runs both, essentially, but one at a time – you can reboot into the other). You could also use Parallels or Fusion to run it within OS X… but I don’t want to bother with that. My 2.0ghz Macbook can handle it on its own.

Started up Boot Camp and popped in the disc. Took about 20 minutes to install (surprisingly!). My first impressions are actually pretty good – like the rest of the internet, it seems. Just about everything was working instantly upon install. I installed the Boot Camp software just to have it completed. Performance seems nearly on part with my Vista desktop (with lesser specs, even).

I still want to test startup time and see what I’m looking at, but I expect it to be decent. My Vista system boots up to the login screen in just about 45 sec to 1 min.

So far so good though… only major “complaint” I have is that right click is a bit awkward. But that’s mostly just because there is only one button. I have to hold two fingers on the touchpad and then click. Thankfully I don’t right click often, so it’s not really a big deal.

EDIT: Turns out it only takes about 50 seconds to boot up to the login screen. And really only a few seconds after I enter my password to get to the desktop.

EDIT2: Apparently I don’t have any sound… Hmm.

That is, if anyone is able to download the damn thing. A friend and I have been trying for the better part of the whole day and neither one of us can get anywhere near an actual download link. The server just blows up every time or we get run in circles.

I hope someone is able to download this damn thing somewhere… but I’d be curious to know how. It sure seems impossible from my end.

It is as frustrating as (if not more so) trying to buy a Bag of Crap during a Woot! Off. That shit is infuriating. At least it’s over quickly though – you just realize you failed and move on with your life.

On the other hand, this Beta continues to disappoint throughout the day. It’s like a sick MS game. And I’m losing.