Microsoft reveals Surface RT pricing, starts at $499 for 32GB

By on October 16, 2012, 10:23 AM

Update: Pre-orders are now live again.

Someone at Microsoft may have pushed a button a little too early and accidentally shared some much anticipated information in the process. A pre-order page for the upcoming Surface RT tablet went live this morning, and though it has since been pulled, the listing finally reveals the last piece of the puzzle: pricing.

The lineup starts at $499 for the 32GB model or $599 with the addition of a black multi-touch TouchCover keyboard case, while a 64GB variant that already includes the TouchCover keyboard is available for $699. Storage-for-storage the base model is $100 cheaper than the equivalent third-generation iPad, which is available at $499 for 16GB, $599 for 32GB or $699 for 64GB.

Additional TouchCovers in a range of colors will be $120 each and the TypeCover keyboard is $130. As a refresher, the former measures 3mm thick and has a multitouch keyboard as well as a trackpad, while the latter adds 5mm to the Surface’s thickness and has a tactile keyboard and a full touchpad with clickable buttons.

Originally unveiled in June, the Surface is a key piece of Microsoft’s Windows 8 launch as the company attempts to break into the tablet market dominated by Apple. The ARM-based version of the device is powered by a quad-core Nvidia Tegra processor, 2GB of memory, a 1,366x768 wide-screen display, and Windows RT. Other features include a USB 2.0 port, HDMI-out, and a vapor-deposited magnesium chassis.

Microsoft expects to ship between 3 and 5 million units in the fall alone, according to the Wall Street Journal's supplier contacts. It remains to be seen if customers respond favorably to the device at the current price points, especially as Apple is rumored to be launching a smaller and cheaper version of the iPad next week.

The Microsoft Surface will go on sale October 26 in Microsoft Stores online and in a range of pop-up stores opening across the US for the occasion. Check out the first TV ad for the device below.

  Surface for Windows 8 Pro Surface for Windows 8 RT
OS Windows 8 Pro Windows 8 RT
Screen 10.6" 1920x1080 10.6" 1366x768
Processor Intel Core i5 22nm ARM-based Nvida
Storage 64GB, 128GB 32GB, 64GB
Thickness 13.5mm (0.53") 9.3mm (0.36")
Weight 903g (1.99lbs) 676g (1.49lbs)
Battery 42Wh 31.5Wh
Connectivity microSDXC, USB 3.0, Mini DisplayPort Video, 2x2 MIMO antennae microSD, USB 2.0, Micro HD Video, 2x2 MIMO antennae
Other Pen support  
Accessories Touch Cover, Type Cover Touch Cover, Type Cover
Price ~$800+ (TBA) $499 (32GB), $599 (32GB w/ TouchCover), $699 (64GB w. TouchCover)



User Comments: 42

Got something to say? Post a comment
Guest said:

Fail fail fail!

oh well @ 300 . .I was kinda excited ...but now ... pffff ..

the pro looks more promising tho .. still needs the be sub 600 IMO ...

lawfer, TechSpot Paladin, said:

I think the price would have been perfect if the keyboard had been included.

Even at this price it competes with the "new" iPad that's only 16Gb. But still on the expensive side for sure.

treeski treeski said:

Obviously I wish it were lower. If it were, I'd consider a purchase. I'm not at all surprised, though. Microsoft wants people to think of these as premium products and let OEMs fill the price gaps at the lower end.

I'm still interested in the Surface Pro, though. I think I've read it won't be available until 2013, but I really hope it hits the market before xmas.

slh28 slh28, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Remember what happened to the Playbook when they priced it on par with the iPad?

Apple can charge pretty much what they want for an iPad because they were the first to market and carry a "premium" label, if MS want to compete then they will have to undercut Apple. What's worse, the $500 entry price is only for the Surface RT.

I think Asus/Google/Amazon are onto much more sensible pricing with the Nexus 7 and Kindle Fire.

treeski treeski said:

Remember what happened to the Playbook when they priced it on par with the iPad?

Apple can charge pretty much what they want for an iPad because they were the first to market and carry a "premium" label, if MS want to compete then they will have to undercut Apple. What's worse, the $500 entry price is only for the Surface RT.

I think Asus/Google/Amazon are onto much more sensible pricing with the Nexus 7 and Kindle Fire.

Microsoft doesn't *need* Surface to be a major seller, though. That's probably what the OEMs will accomplish. They are creating a lot of buzz about the Surface, pricing it high (so it is perceived as a premium product), and letting OEMs hit the low price points. To this effect, people who really love the Surface will cash out for it, and those who think it's too expensive (but are still interested) will seek cheaper alternatives in OEM products. MS wins regardless.

1 person liked this | Razer said:

Obviously I wish it were lower. If it were, I'd consider a purchase. I'm not at all surprised, though. Microsoft wants people to think of these as premium products and let OEMs fill the price gaps at the lower end.

I'm still interested in the Surface Pro, though. I think I've read it won't be available until 2013, but I really hope it hits the market before xmas.

I'm thinking the same too

VitalyT VitalyT said:

Windows 8 for desktop is missing out on applications working well on it. Windows 8 RT app base is nearly non-existent, compared to other platforms.

Who would want it, really? Ok, it looks nice, it is fast and reliable. But it's just useless, pointless investment for anyone who touches it.

treeski treeski said:

Windows 8 for desktop is missing out on applications working well on it. Windows 8 RT app base is nearly non-existent, compared to other platforms.

Who would want it, really? Ok, it looks nice, it is fast and reliable. But it's just useless, pointless investment for anyone who touches it.

I've been using Win8 on my desktop for several months and I haven't had any issues with my desktop programs, so I'm not sure where you're coming from on that note. The MS store selection is limited, but it is already growing pretty fast and it is getting bigger name apps right off the bat. I think there are plenty of reasons to buy in, even if not via the Surface RT.

1 person liked this | slh28 slh28, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Microsoft doesn't *need* Surface to be a major seller, though. That's probably what the OEMs will accomplish. They are creating a lot of buzz about the Surface, pricing it high (so it is perceived as a premium product), and letting OEMs hit the low price points. To this effect, people who really love the Surface will cash out for it, and those who think it's too expensive (but are still interested) will seek cheaper alternatives in OEM products. MS wins regardless.

Nobody perceives any MS product as premium. To the general computer user they just make programs and OS's which are used in everyday life. They're not Louis Vuitton or Pagani, their brand doesn't carry very much value at all and for that reason they won't get away with pricing it so high.

Guest said:

"Who would want it, really? Ok, it looks nice, it is fast and reliable. But it's just useless, pointless investment for anyone who touches it."

I want it, and lots of people more than you think want it..

treeski treeski said:

Nobody perceives any MS product as premium. To the general computer user they just make programs and OS's which are used in everyday life. They're not Louis Vuitton or Pagani, their brand doesn't carry very much value at all and for that reason they won't get away with pricing it so high.

I won't argue that MS products aren't currently perceived as premium, but that is what they are trying to change. And of course MS products have value, lol. That was a silly comment. Aaaand of course they will get away with pricing the Surface so highly, because they don't need to sell them like hot cakes.

m4a4 m4a4 said:

...pointless investment for anyone who touches it.

How is it that you can call the Surface RT that, but all other tablets (which can arguably do less) are fine?

And then the Pro model (that has x86 architecture) will do basically everything a desktop can do... it will just cost you almost as much as an ultrabook...

slh28 slh28, TechSpot Paladin, said:

I won't argue that MS products aren't currently perceived as premium, but that is what they are trying to change.

You can't change a brand overnight, or even over 5-10 years. Microsoft products, e.g. XP/7/Word/Excel are perceived (perhaps unfairly) as necessities, not stylish or cutting edge or innovative. Last time MS tried to take on Apple at their own game was the Zune...

I think MS should be promoting these tablets to the corporate and educational sectors, I can definitely see potential there. But instead there's no target market and prices are way too high for companies or schools/universities to consider buying them. If the base RT costs $500 that means the Pro version (which is actually very interesting looking at the spec sheet) will cost around the same as an ultrabook or even more.

VitalyT VitalyT said:

How is it that you can call the Surface RT that, but all other tablets (which can arguably do less) are fine?

And then the Pro model (that has x86 architecture) will do basically everything a desktop can do... it will just cost you almost as much as an ultrabook...

Windows 8 RT is too inferior to Windows 8, a sub-platform that can offer much less than Windows 8 for x86. The other tables offer platforms that have a huge app base.

VitalyT VitalyT said:

I've been using Win8 on my desktop for several months and I haven't had any issues with my desktop programs, so I'm not sure where you're coming from on that note.

So have I Please read again, I was talking about problems with Windows 8 RT, not your standard x86.

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

The lack of USB 3.0 on anything that cost more than $500 is a decision maker for me. That is the one standard I have come to expect from any device that I will be considering to purchase in the future.

1 person liked this | treeski treeski said:

I won't argue that MS products aren't currently perceived as premium, but that is what they are trying to change.

You can't change a brand overnight, or even over 5-10 years. Microsoft products, e.g. XP/7/Word/Excel are perceived (perhaps unfairly) as necessities, not stylish or cutting edge or innovative. Last time MS tried to take on Apple at their own game was the Zune...

I think MS should be promoting these tablets to the corporate and educational sectors, I can definitely see potential there. But instead there's no target market and prices are way too high for companies or schools/universities to consider buying them. If the base RT costs $500 that means the Pro version (which is actually very interesting looking at the spec sheet) will cost around the same as an ultrabook or even more.

Lol, this is my last comment on the matter, because I'm just not getting my point across. You can't create a premium brand by selling your products at a low price. So however long it takes, any products that MS wants perceived as premium, will be sold at a premium price.

Also, Microsoft does not need the Surface to sell well!!! The whole point of the Surface is to create buzz and get people interested in the Windows 8 touch friendly form factor. The OEMs will sell tablets with Win8 RT at more competitive prices.

And of course the Pro will cost around the same as an ultrabook... it has the same capabilities!

1 person liked this | MilwaukeeMike said:

You can't change a brand overnight, or even over 5-10 years. Microsoft products, e.g. XP/7/Word/Excel are perceived (perhaps unfairly) as necessities, not stylish or cutting edge or innovative. Last time MS tried to take on Apple at their own game was the Zune...

An important thing to remember. Windows 8 is the first product out of MS since their antitrust suit where the justice department hasn't been involved. As part of the antitrust settlement (for bundling IE with Windows and killing Netscape) Microsoft has had justice department auditors in all their meetings making sure they didn't produce anything that was going to sell too well.

Now the 9 years have passed and MS is again free to design and build as they want. I'm not saying they're going to overnight become some super popular company, but we should at least hold judgement till we try out the product this time.

9Nails, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Hey, it's $100 cheaper than the iPad! That isn't half bad.

If it were an Xbox 720 and $100 cheaper than the PS4 we would be happy. But the thing is the iPad's on proven ground and this is playing catch up. Will it feel like it is in the hands of a user?

slh28 slh28, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Lol, this is my last comment on the matter, because I'm just not getting my point across. You can't create a premium brand by selling your products at a low price. So however long it takes, any products that MS wants perceived as premium, will be sold at a premium price.

Also, Microsoft does not need the Surface to sell well!!! The whole point of the Surface is to create buzz and get people interested in the Windows 8 touch friendly form factor. The OEMs will sell tablets with Win8 RT at more competitive prices.

And of course the Pro will cost around the same as an ultrabook... it has the same capabilities!

No I understand your point but why would Microsoft want to reinvent themselves into something they're not while alienating their main user base - the general computer user? Surely the best way of promoting Windows 8 is to price the Surface tablets at a reasonable price point, get people using them and thinking "Hey I like the way Windows 8 looks and feels, I think I'll get Windows 8 for my desktop too" or "This TouchCover keyboard is great for both functionality and productivity, I can buy MS Office and do work on it". As it stands not many people would buy a Surface RT over an iPad at the same price, and consequently MS might also risk losing users to OSX.

Also I'd reserve judgement on the OEMs until they come out, if PC OEMs are anything to go by they might come loaded with bloatware or be of questionable quality.

lawfer, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Lol, this is my last comment on the matter, because I'm just not getting my point across. You can't create a premium brand by selling your products at a low price. So however long it takes, any products that MS wants perceived as premium, will be sold at a premium price.

Also, Microsoft does not need the Surface to sell well!!! The whole point of the Surface is to create buzz and get people interested in the Windows 8 touch friendly form factor. The OEMs will sell tablets with Win8 RT at more competitive prices.

And of course the Pro will cost around the same as an ultrabook... it has the same capabilities!

No I understand your point but why would Microsoft want to reinvent themselves into something they're not while alienating their main user base - the general computer user? Surely the best way of promoting Windows 8 is to price the Surface tablets at a reasonable price point, get people using them and thinking "Hey I like the way Windows 8 looks and feels, I think I'll get Windows 8 for my desktop too" or "This TouchCover keyboard is great for both functionality and productivity, I can buy MS Office and do work on it". As it stands not many people would buy a Surface RT over an iPad at the same price, and consequently MS might also risk losing users to OSX.

Also I'd reserve judgement on the OEMs until they come out, if PC OEMs are anything to go by they might come loaded with bloatware or be of questionable quality.

You don't know whether people would buy an iPad over Windows RT. Mainly, because, you know, it's not even out yet. But here's the thing: the words "Windows" and "Office" are more universal than "iPad" or, erm, "Pages".

As for price, the Surface is $100 cheaper than the comparable iPad.

As for build quality, it is superior.

There are a lot of reasons for consumers to get the Surface RT; they main one is that it's coming directly from Microsoft, a company the regular consumer considers the Apple equivalent. More importantly however: the Apple equivalent with <I>no hardware to match, until now</I>. You see, if Google comes out with a tablet with the quality of the iPad or Surface, I'm pretty sure even then people wouldn't go for it as much as the aforementioned two. Reason is, Google is more often than not attached with "search"; sure it's a tech company, but not one where its resources' focus has been towards the regular consumer outside of simply providing ad-funded services. They make services, not so much software. (I know many of their services are intrinsically software, including Android, but I'm talking about perception here.)

But as soon as you say "Windows" and "Office", it's over. Someone goes to the store, they're told that Microsoft has made their own tablet, with "full" Windows and Office included, you think people (who might even currently own an iPad but, say, happen to use Windows as their desktop) are really going to go for the iPad? Don't think so. It's all really about brand awareness and value proposition.

slh28 slh28, TechSpot Paladin, said:

But as soon as you say "Windows" and "Office", it's over. Someone goes to the store, they're told that Microsoft has made their own tablet, with "full" Windows and Office included, you think people (who might even currently own an iPad but, say, happen to use Windows as their desktop) are really going to go for the iPad? Don't think so. It's all really about brand awareness and value proposition.

I don't see how non-tech people who would get excited over Windows and Office. Don't know the exact numbers but very few people do any sort of productive work on their tablets. Unfortunately Apple's marketing seems to have got to a lot of people who shell out $500/£400 on a shiny toy just to play Angry Birds or to browse the internet or collecting dust at home. The Surface RT is competing in this category, and the pricing is not getting anyone's interest. At $500 it does have 16GB more storage and a micro SD slot but also an outdated chip and crappy resolution compared to the $500 iPad.

Now the Surface Pro is in a different category, it has a proper i5 chip (albeit downclocked) running Windows 8 Pro and could be interesting as a laptop replacement but it all depends on price and how it compares to the ultrabooks out there. Given the 64GB Surface RT costs $700 I don't see a 64GB Surface Pro retailing for less than $850-900 and that's dangerously close to ultrabooks.

lawfer, TechSpot Paladin, said:

I don't see how non-tech people who would get excited over Windows and Office. Don't know the exact numbers but very few people do any sort of productive work on their tablets. Unfortunately Apple's marketing seems to have got to a lot of people who shell out $500/£400 on a shiny toy just to play Angry Birds or to browse the internet or collecting dust at home. The Surface RT is competing in this category, and the pricing is not getting anyone's interest. At $500 it does have 16GB more storage and a micro SD slot but also an outdated chip and crappy resolution compared to the $500 iPad.

Now the Surface Pro is in a different category, it has a proper i5 chip (albeit downclocked) running Windows 8 Pro and could be interesting as a laptop replacement but it all depends on price and how it compares to the ultrabooks out there. Given the 64GB Surface RT costs $700 I don't see a 64GB Surface Pro retailing for less than $850-900 and that's dangerously close to ultrabooks.

Non-tech people? Where do you live? Where do you leave stay/work-at-home moms, college students, businessmen, etc. then?

And very few people do any sort of productive work on their tablets because there was never a compelling option. Surface RT bringing Office bundled for free is not a coincidence, Microsoft is trying to change the perception of a tablet being a media consumption device only. That's what their whole "Work & Play" and "PC+" thing is about.

Leaving out that fact, you also have to consider this again: it comes with Office. Like I said, it's all about brand awareness and value proposition. Everyone is aware of what Office is and what it entails; it's a productivity suite that's rather expensive because it's the best. That suite comes pre-installed for free on Windows RT tablets. A regular consumer who might have never considered using his tablet for work (or someone who currently uses an iPad for play, but a desktop PC for productivity) might change his/her mind for two reasons (not including what marketing would do): 1) The cost of the Surface becomes justifiable as Office, a $100+ suite is factored in, and 2) If Office is included, why not then turn your tablet into productivity device?

You said it yourself. Most people only consume on their tablets and usually work on other devices. But by trying to bridge that gap, and offering it at $100 less than its direct competitor, I fail to see why would the average user not seriously consider buying it.

Also, no one but us cares about the SoC or resolution. People, as you mentioned, only care about consuming and the experience, and they are willing to shell out a few hundred dollars for a premium product.

Guest said:

Because the cult of Apple knows no bounds. They would pay ANY price for an apple product, ANY... Apple toilet $20000 - no problem, Apple toaster $270000. Blinded with love and almost obsessive in their devotion they will ignore ANY other product on the market. Its the rest of us that buy non apple products such as surface and RT/Windows 8. Non Apple owners are more tech savvy it seems and like to seek out a bargain or at the very least a good deal. The pro version of surface is too expensive in Ultrabook price range but give it time, the prices will fall. I have a stange feeling that RT will fall by the wayside but hey I've been wrong before(Android too strong).

dennis777 dennis777 said:

Was hoping the it would be price for $200 tough luck

ikesmasher said:

Still not buying one until im allowed to install apps outside the MS store. Thats pathetic. it really is.

Teko03 said:

Still not buying one until im allowed to install apps outside the MS store. Thats pathetic. it really is.

Kind of a dumb reason. Anything outside of the app store isn't even supported by Surface RT. You do know there's a Surface Pro coming later...right?

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Kind of a dumb reason. Anything outside of the app store isn't even supported by Surface RT. You do know there's a Surface Pro coming later...right?
If I'm not mistaken Surface Pro would require the app creator to pay a premium for selling their app in the app store, even if all they were interested in was to bare the Windows 8 logo. I'm not supporting Microsoft in their efforts of thievery, forcing app creators to pay a premium when they want their app used in Windows 8 RT or sold in the app store of Windows 8 Pro or just to bare the Windows 8 logo which automatically places the app in the app store.

Guest said:

It's a computer.

Doesn't matter if tablet, all other tabs r trying to be an iPad. This is a full blown PC, but on you at all times (ie: mobile computer). Most people who need a laptop/notebook, do so for typing. Those who use touchscreen tablets use them for watching movies & multimedia... web browsing.

The MS Surface is both, but better because it conforms to ur PC at home too.. I don't own an apple computer, so why own an iPhone, or a iPad..? What I have @ home, I want identical to my mobile experience. Obviously, I am not going to play BF3 on a MS surface, but blogging, spreadsheet finalizations, editing, etc.. all within easy grasp now.

Touch screen + keyboard = brilliant.

lawfer, TechSpot Paladin, said:

If I'm not mistaken Surface Pro would require the app creator to pay a premium for selling their app in the app store, even if all they were interested in was to bare the Windows 8 logo. I'm not supporting Microsoft in their efforts of thievery, forcing app creators to pay a premium when they want their app used in Windows 8 RT or sold in the app store of Windows 8 Pro or just to bare the Windows 8 logo which automatically places the app in the app store.

The Surface Pro runs on x86 architecture. So it's a regular PC.

In other words, none of what you said makes sense.

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

The Surface Pro runs on x86 architecture. So it's a regular PC.

In other words, none of what you said makes sense.

According to the comments I read here - [link]

Microsoft is differentiating between who gets certified and who doesn't, depending on which creator pay royalties to Microsoft.

I did not once say that apps will no longer run under Windows 8 Pro. I did say they may not bare the Windows 8 logo which represents being Windows 8 certified. And getting Windows 8 certified automatically places the app in the app store which comes with an outrageous price for being there. And if all this is true you will never see any freeware within the app store. Which also means non of these apps will ever be available to the Windows 8 RT Surface, even though they could potentially qualify.

1 person liked this | lawfer, TechSpot Paladin, said:

The Surface Pro runs on x86 architecture. So it's a regular PC.

In other words, none of what you said makes sense.

According to the comments I read here - [link]

Microsoft is differentiating between who gets certified and who doesn't, depending on which creator pay royalties to Microsoft.

I did not once say that apps will no longer run under Windows 8 Pro. I did say they may not bare the Windows 8 logo which represents being Windows 8 certified. And getting Windows 8 certified automatically places the app in the app store which comes with an outrageous price for being there. And if all this is true you will never see any freeware within the app store. Which also means non of these apps will ever be available to the Windows 8 RT Surface, even though they could potentially qualify.

I think you are confused my friend.

Windows RT and Windows 8 are not the same OS. They really only share the Start Screen.

The Surface Pro is a regular ultrabook running full Windows 8. The Surface RT runs, well, Windows RT.

The reason Notch is mad is because he wants his game to be sold through the Store on RT devices, but he doesn't want to pay royalties to Microsoft. But here's where it gets funny: this model is <I>no different</I> than when he sells Minecraft through Xbox Live Arcade on the Xbox 360, as Microsoft also collects royalties off of the purchase.

If you purchase a Surface Pro, just like by upgrading a Windows 7 computer to Windows 8, you have the option to either use the Store or download legacy applications through the web. If you don't want your software to be Windows 8 certified (which only means you don't want to pay MS royalties for publishing your app on <I>their</I> OS), then you have the option to have users go directly to your website and download the software, like always.

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

I think you are confused my friend.
Nope, not confused, you've not said anything that I don't already understand.

In my twisted little mind all these year, windows certification has always represented software that would run on Windows. I guess I was wrong as it really means windows certification was bought for those that wanted the right to bare a Windows Logo. This certification is a misrepresentation of all the software titles available for use with Windows.

When I go to the store looking for applications to run on Windows 8, should I be looking for a logo that represents the apps compatibility or should I be looking for an app that bares a bought logo? I don't have a problem with paying royalties to Microsoft for promoting apps in the app store. I do have a problem with the windows certification program having a price tag for any app to bare Window certification that should represent compatibility.

ikesmasher said:

Kind of a dumb reason. Anything outside of the app store isn't even supported by Surface RT. You do know there's a Surface Pro coming later...right?

I should have said im not buying any windows 8 tablet if I cant get software outside of the MS store. Even if its ~$200.

Microsoft wants to push people off the desktop and towards tablets, but I cant live off of just store apps, I want my PC to feel like its MINE, that I made the software suite on it the way it is, and requiring a specific store makes it feel like it belongs to microsoft.

Guest said:

Judging by the commercial, the device can only be used to produce a sexy click sound when the cover is attached to the display. Priceless.

lawfer, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Nope, not confused, you've not said anything that I don't already understand.

In my twisted little mind all these year, windows certification has always represented software that would run on Windows. I guess I was wrong as it really means windows certification was bought for those that wanted the right to bare a Windows Logo. This certification is a misrepresentation of all the software titles available for use with Windows.

When I go to the store looking for applications to run on Windows 8, should I be looking for a logo that represents the apps compatibility or should I be looking for an app that bares a bought logo? I don't have a problem with paying royalties to Microsoft for promoting apps in the app store. I do have a problem with the windows certification program having a price tag for any app to bare Window certification that should represent compatibility.

Nah, I think you're confused.

App Certification, as the term implies, is not simply "software that would run on Windows," but software that meets certain criteria and performance standards to be included in the store. Remember, Windows RT is not Windows 8; it is a ARM-compatible, heavily sandboxed, and most of all, striped-down version of Windows 8 made for tablets. Thus, only carefully certified apps are allowed to enter the Store to maintain consistency. App certification shouldn't be a mystery: Apple does it for their App Store, and Google does it for Google Play.

What you seem to be confused about is a couple of things:

1) There's no such thing as a "Windows 8 certified" logo. I don't know where you got that from. Certification here refers to be included in the Store in the first place.

2) The Surface Pro (or any PC upgraded to Windows 8) can use both x86 applications as well as WinRT applications. So developers have the option to <I>not</I> distribute their software through the Store if they so choose; which brings us to my other reply to your second post about Notch's complaints.

There's no "thievery" here, as only developers who wish to have their apps run on RT devices have to go through certification. But guess what? If your "app" happens to be a legacy, x86 program, you could still be included in the store, and that "app" will also go through certification; though it'll just take you to the developer's website to download the app instead of downloading it directly from the Store like with WinRT apps.

For more info, here's the app certification program page that outlines app requirements to enter the Store.

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

And yes I do believe its thievery and nothing you can say will change my mind. As you say Microsoft is not the first company to use such tactics with an app store, its just the first time these tactics include me personally and I do not agree with them. Thievery in the same sense as the music industry taking the biggest chunk of profit from the music artist. And there is nothing the artist can do about it if they want their music published. It the same problem I have with the big companies intentionally squashing little companies.

Nah, I think you're confused.

Perhaps I am confused because, I didn't understand a thing you just said. And to be honest, I don't think the majority of consumers would understand either. It's nice knowing you think Windows certification has always included Microsoft shimming off the top of every app sold within an app store. They apparently changed the rules with Windows Certification when they created the app store.

lawfer, TechSpot Paladin, said:

And yes I do believe its thievery and nothing you can say will change my mind. As you say Microsoft is not the first company to use such tactics with an app store, its just the first time these tactics include me personally and I do not agree with them. Thievery in the same sense as the music industry taking the biggest chunk of profit from the music artist. And there is nothing the artist can do about it if they want their music published. It the same problem I have with the big companies intentionally squashing little companies.

Nah, I think you're confused.

Perhaps I am confused because, I didn't understand a thing you just said. And to be honest, I don't think the majority of consumers would understand either. It's nice knowing you think Windows certification has always included Microsoft shimming off the top of every app sold within an app store. They apparently changed the rules with Windows Certification when they created the app store.

"Thievery" is not even the right word. You don't have a choice when someone robs you. You either give up the valuables or suffer the consequences.

If you don't want your app certified to appear on the Store, you could just publish it online like other developers, or, more importantly, like everyone has done since the beginning. Download.com, SoftPedia, hell, TechSpot's own Download section comes to mind.

Your other example doesn't make sense; artists are given a contact in which they are explained how royalty pay works. And they sign it. It's called a 360 deal. Artists don't have to sign, they can always go independent.

But imagine if the label allowed you to <I>not</I> have to sign a 360 deal, and still enjoy the benefits of the label (sponsors, marketing, etc.)? Well, those exist too. And in our analogy, that would be Microsoft.

And you don't understand perhaps because you don't want to. Consumers are not meant to know about the app certification process, so I don't know where that came from.

Lastly, I don't know what you've been reading, but the certification process was first created for Windows 8. They haven't "changed" anything lol. I guess that's my cue to just leave it at that...

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Lastly, I don't know what you've been reading, but the certification process was first created for Windows 8. They haven't "changed" anything lol. I guess that's my cue to just leave it at that...
Windows Installer and Logo Requirements

The Certified for Microsoft Windows Logo identifies products that have been verified through independent testing to comply with the Application Specification for Windows. This specification was developed by Microsoft in cooperation with customers and other developers to provide a road map for building reliable and manageable applications. Software vendors who comply with the specification qualify for the Certified for Microsoft Windows logo and then license the logo for use on their product packaging, advertising, collateral, and other marketing materials.
Am I making it more complicated than it really is? Has there not been any changes in how app creators get their apps certified in Windows 8? Is this not the very same thing that has been present since the beginning of Windows Logo only now it has changed since the inclusion of the app store?

Guest said:

I would very much consider purchasing this product. I am a Windows user and it would have serious potential for me because it would work with the other 5 Windows based machines that I own. I have owned two iPads and to be honest could not stomach them at all. I sold them both...an iPad 1 and then the 2. I know that a lot of folks wanted to see Microsoft come in at a lower price point and then there is also those that argue the Ultrabook point, but on both fronts they have no reason to lowball the jeepers out of the Apple products and it has a different use than an Ultrabook. Folks will ALWAYS complain because it is their nature and that is a fact of life just like it is a fact of life that a behemoth like Microsoft can offer a new product at the price point that they do because folks will buy it. Personally I was sad when they gave up on the Zune. I had 2 of them and LOVED them. Once again I could not stomach the iPods at all. My Zunes were more durable, the software less taxing, and the audio/video quality was great. The biggest thing about Apple is that they are smoke and mirrors. Their products have issues just as much as others yet the fans have a misguided notion that their beloved Apple is infallible.

Teko03 said:

I should have said im not buying any windows 8 tablet if I cant get software outside of the MS store. Even if its ~$200.

Microsoft wants to push people off the desktop and towards tablets, but I cant live off of just store apps, I want my PC to feel like its MINE, that I made the software suite on it the way it is, and requiring a specific store makes it feel like it belongs to microsoft.

What do you need outside of the store as far as apps go? The Windows Store is simply a centralized application to get the apps. This is the same thing Apple does wit the App Store, any web link is going to send you to the Apple App Store. Sure MS is collecting royalties, but MS is also ensuring the apps meet certain guidelines so that you have the best experience with the Windows Store Apps. I think this is no different than them setting required specs for Windows Phone devices, right?

And again, you say you just can't live off of store apps, the Surface Pro which will run both store apps & LEGACY (x86) apps. So why are you so upset? There's a device that does what you want coming! And there's also versions from OEM's coming.

Requiring store apps makes it a tablet, not a PC...the Surface RT is not meant to be a PC.

ikesmasher said:

And its also stupidly overpriced coming. I disapprove of MS requiring app developers to get apps approved by them, because the same thing happens that happens with apple, if if might take a chunk out of some MS software's business, they dont have to allow it in.

Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.