Apr 16, 2018 11:54 EDT
For many consumers, Microsoft's Surface brand of hardware represents the best that Windows has to offer. The problem is that this has rarely been the case, and it leaves many consumers spending a lot of money on something that isn't up to snuff.
If you ask me, it all started with Apple. This is speculation, but it seems to me that from iPhones and Macs, people got the idea that first-party hardware is just always better. After all, if the software and the hardware is designed by the same company, it must be the best overall experience, right?
I hear the same thing about Google's Pixel phones. They have a stock Android experience, so it's "Android the way that Google intended it".
Except Windows is completely different than Android, in the sense that almost every Android handset manufacturer puts a skin on the OS, and very few offer a stock experience. Most premium Windows 10 PCs these days are Signature PCs, meaning that they offer minimal bloatware.
It's true sometimes...
Microsoft's Surface lineup is meant to explore new ideas and form factors for PCs, which can later be imitated by third-party manufacturers. When the original Surface Pro was introduced, it offered something that other PCs didn't, an Intel Core i5-based tablet that could also be used as a laptop.
The Surface Book then offered the opposite of that. Rather than a tablet that could be used as a laptop, it was more of a laptop that could also be used as a tablet.
... ... ...