Digitally Dark: The Experiment

Digitally Dark: The Experiment

A couple of weeks ago I posted about Absolute Software's LoJack Challenge, where the company asked me to go without my mobile device for two days as a simulation of having your phone stolen. I just completed going "digitally dark," and the results surprised me.

What's the first thing that comes to mind for most people when they think they lost their phone? You're probably saying things like "email access," "Twitter feeds," and "Google Maps," because that's what I thought I'd miss most during the two days of my phone-less life. For me, however, that turned out to be wrong as the thing I missed most was also the most basic: the clock. I never realized how many times I pull my phone out of my pocket just to see what time it is. Having only a rough idea of the time turned out to be more stressful than not having access to my email.

This is what I missed the most...

Related to time, I found that I needed to use a different source for my alarm clock as I have become so used to using Gentle Alarm to wake me up in the morning. This was less annoying than not having access to the clock throughout the day, but was something I hadn't considered when taking on the LoJack Challenge.

So what about things that the phone was designed for, such as calls, SMS messages, email, and the like? In the beginning of the challenge I found myself drawn to grabbing my phone during downtimes just to see if anyone had sent me a message and I was surprised by how many times this happened. Not having the phone available didn't really impact my life at all and I never really felt "disconnected" from the world. Constantly checking the device is clearly a habit and being disconnected from an "always on" world was actually helpful. While eating lunch, for example, I did some people watching instead of web surfing, a nice change of pace.

There were also a few times that I wanted to look up some obscure trivia fact, but not enough that I wanted to open up my laptop to find the answer.

I think my wife was probably more annoyed by the LoJack Challenge than I was: Since we have no landline, I was literally off the grid and, aside from RFC 1149 (IP over Carrier Pigeon!), there was no way to get ahold of me. During the challenge, I actually questioned the need to spend $95 a month on my phone, something I never would've guessed would run through my head before I took the challenge. Using a lower-cost, lower-performing carrier like Virgin Mobile seems like it might be a decent option.


Now this challenge would've been a lot different if my phone had actually been stolen as opposed to put away for a couple of days. While I don't use my mobile device for banking or other sensitive activities, having email, Twitter, and Facebook always authenticated could open me and my friends up to malicious activity, so taking some time to think about how to protect your devices with some combination of encryption, tracking, and password protection is an important task to undertake.

Have you tried giving up your mobile device for a few days? If so, we'd love to hear your experiences!

Office for iPad revenue model called 'unfair' for Apple, except it's not

Did you know Apple won't earn money off Office 365 subscriptions sold at a Microsoft Store, Best Buy or other non-Apple outlet? It's true! Apple will not make any money off something it has no control over for a product it doesn't make.

If this sounds obvious, it's because it is. But that's not stopping Computerworld from running an absurd article with this headline: "Nadella to Cook on Office revenue sharing: Drop dead." The implication being that Satya Nadella, Microsoft's CEO, is trying to swindle Tim Cook, Apple's CEO, and not deliver payment for something Apple should reap profits from. The only problem with this supposition is it's absurdly stupid (and there are actually a million problems with it, but I was trying to be nice by saying there's only one problem).

As confirmed by Apple, Microsoft will pay the standard 30 percent cut of in-app purchases to Cook's company. This means 70 percent of the revenue from all Office 365 purchases made within the new iPad apps will go to Microsoft, while the remaining 30 percent goes to Apple. If a person already has an Office 365 account from work, however, Apple won't receive a cut from it. Similarly, if a person were to buy an Office 365 subscription directly from any retail store outside the apps, then Apple won't receive any cut of the proceeds.

According to Computerworld, this isn't good enough for Apple, since the revenue it earns from the apps will be "a pittance for a company that recorded $57.6 billion in the December 2013 quarter alone." So, in other words, a company that makes billions on its hardware sales, music sales, movie sales and app sales won't significantly increase its bottomline from three apps. Shocking news, right?

As explained by Computerworld, Microsoft recently said it has about 3.5 million Office 365 subscribers. If all of those subscribers had purchased their subscriptions through one of the Office for iPad apps, then Apple would only make $105 million annually on the sales. This is an affront to Apple, Computerworld argues, because, again, it makes a boatload of money, and it's simply not fair that Microsoft won't give Apple more since it "cut Apple out of most of the revenue stream by making the apps free to download." This argument is again absurd, as the apps are free to download simply to view files. If an iPad owner wants editing functionality, he or she can purchase it through an app, where Apple will get a cut.

The payment method doesn't seem to bother Nadella or Cook publicly, however, as the two chief executives exchanged pleasantries on Twitter regarding the Office for iPad release.

In reality, the apps are great for both companies. For Microsoft, it should bring in more Office 365 subscriptions or at least provide an incentive for companies to keep their subscriptions. Conversely, Apple makes a decent cut off subscriptions to a service it doesn't have to maintain, and it also brings a big-name productivity app to its store. It's been beneficial so far, with all three of the Office for iPad apps ranking in the top 30 of the iPad's app purchases chart (Word sits at No. 4, Excel at No. 12 and PowerPoint at No. 29), meaning subscriptions are being sold within the apps at a decent rate.

If that arrangement is Nadella telling Cook to "drop dead," then that's certainly a new way to say it.

TV is Microsoft's for the taking, if it wants

When Microsoft announced the Xbox One last year, it heavily promoted the television features of the device. Microsoft actually had a grander vision for television, however, one that appears to have ultimately been scrapped.

Prior to Microsoft’s Xbox One reveal, reports surfaced that the company wouldn’t unleash one new Xbox console, but two: The Xbox One as well as a set-top box more focused on TV content than gaming. Further reports indicated Microsoft wanted to create its own subscription TV service, potentially called Xbox Live Diamond (a step up from Xbox Live Gold), but problems with channel operators torpedoed the plans. The Xbox One still ended up with significant television capabilities, including several streaming apps and the ability to control existing cable and satellite set-top boxes, but what shipped lacked the grandeur Microsoft had planned.

On the computer front, Microsoft has practically abandoned TV entirely. The company’s Windows Media Center software is essentially dead, as it now only exists as an add-on pack for Windows 8 Pro and lacks significant updates since its Windows 7 iteration. While third-party TV tuner software still exists, most lack the quality found in Media Center, which mostly received raved reviews when it launched. Part of the problem can be placed on consumer habits, as TV tuners haven’t exactly become a hot commodity, but the market appears to have shifted to an area where Microsoft can still compete – and perhaps compete even better: hardware.

As Microsoft toils with uncertainty for its TV plans outside its new console, its competitors are champing at the bit for a place in the growing field. Apple TV is expected to receive a major update in the near future, with gaming and subscription features rumored in the pipeline. Google is expected to announce a massive overhaul of Android TV, with gaming capabilities, a refined interface and dedicated apps. Even Amazon is entering the fray with its recently announced Fire TV, a set-top box based on Android with apps, gaming and streaming services tied in.

The set-top box market is growing, and it's also ripe for Microsoft's taking.

If the combination of apps, light gaming features and service integration sounds familiar for a TV set-top box, it should: That’s exactly the kind of device Microsoft was considering launching alongside the Xbox One before getting cold feet.

Xbox TV would have been a predecessor to Fire TV and the reported overhaul of Android TV, with the ability to play casual games and stream multimedia content from an operating system based on “the core components of Windows 8.” According to some reports, the device would have even featured an integrated Kinect sensor, allowing voice navigation and video chatting – the former of which will be offered by Fire TV, but the latter of which no major player is even attempting in the set-top box field.

Microsoft’s reluctance to take a game-changing step into the TV field makes sense, given that channel operators and content producers are notoriously cutthroat when it comes to retransmission agreements and licensing content. As more technology companies enter the set-top box field, however, it’s clear they’re willing to start small, with third-party streaming services, first-party content services and apps serving as the overwhelming majority of entertainment features at the moment. So the question remains: Why not enter the field and strike while the iron’s hot?


Office for iPad and free Windows licensing for small-screen devices show the importance of services to Microsoft. The Redmond giant is clearly focused on getting users tied into its infrastructure, and sometimes doing so requires gambles.

While Amazon can offer its voice search for Fire TV, Microsoft can offer Cortana with Bing integration. While Google and Apple can offer the Play Store and iTunes, respectively, Microsoft can offer its Xbox stores. And on the gaming front, none of Microsoft’s competitors can offer an infrastructure that rivals Xbox Live. If Microsoft wants to go further, it could integrate a Kinect sensor in the device for video calling, as was reported in 2012, and tie in Skype as a service.

Even on the interface front, Microsoft seems prepared for a set-top box. Its Metro design language may have been met with a mixed response from PC users, but it’s hard to argue that the interface’s tiles aren’t appealing on a TV. It’s no surprise that Google’s purported Android TV design eschews icons in favor of tiles similar to those found on a Metro interface – it’s simply a better fit for a screen that people sit several feet away from. Programming listings also fit perfectly within the design, as Xbox One’s OneGuide has proven.

Perhaps the biggest reason why Microsoft seems poised for an entry in television, however, came at its recent Build 2014 developer conference. There, Microsoft announced its universal app initiative, allowing developers to make Windows and Windows Phone apps for a combined store with greater ease than before. Xbox One app and game development will benefit from the initiative as well, which will surely encourage developers to release their work across the entire Windows ecosystem.

Microsoft seems uniquely qualified in the tech industry to make a TV set-top box. Typically, companies face many questions when entering a new market segment. The only major question Microsoft faces for a set-top box, however, is why it hasn’t made one yet.

Does Nokia's Z Launcher foreshadow the company becoming an Android manufacturer?

Does Nokia's Z Launcher foreshadow the company becoming an Android manufacturer?

Prior to becoming an exclusive Windows Phone manufacturer, Nokia contemplated making phones with Google’s Android operating system. Eventually, the company decided against it, determining that the ecosystem wasn’t a level playing field. With the release of Nokia’s Z Launcher for Android, however, could the company revisit its decision?

Nokia finalized the sale of its devices and services group to Microsoft earlier this year, and it agreed to not release any smartphone hardware until 2016 as part of the deal. Quality smartphone hardware – hardware that isn’t simply rebranded from third-party vendors – takes significant time to develop, however, meaning Microsoft’s demand may not have been much of problem for Nokia. In the interim, there’s obviously nothing stopping Nokia from releasing Android software.

In terms of hardware, Nokia still has to build itself back up from nothing. Nokia’s deal with Microsoft sent its entire consumer hardware team to the Windows Phone developer, including the group behind the Nokia X line, a series of Android-powered smartphones currently aimed at developing markets. What remains of Nokia is largely its enterprise-focused business unit, a subsidiary called Nokia Solutions and Networks that provides networking services and telecommunications equipment, and its HERE mapping service.

In a July 2013 interview, former Nokia CEO Stephen Elop said the company worried about “the very high risk that one hardware manufacturer could come to dominate Android.” That suspicion turned out to be prophetic, as Samsung has dominated the Android smartphone market, while Nokia went on to command 85 percent of the substantially smaller Windows Phone market thanks to hardware that was superior to its competitors.

“We had a suspicion of who it might be, because of the resources available, the vertical integration, and we were respectful of the fact that we were quite late in making that decision,” Elop said. “Many others were in that space already.”


Nokia’s relationship with Microsoft wasn’t as beneficial as the company probably would have liked in the end, as it continued to hemorrhage money before agreeing to sell its devices and services unit to Microsoft for more than $7 billion. Prior to that deal, Nokia shrewdly acquired Siemens stake in the two companies’ joint venture, the aforementioned Nokia Solutions and Networks (then known as Nokia Siemens Networks). The joint venture had been unprofitable for the two companies, but that changed the year before their sale agreement. Nokia made savvy business decisions by acquiring its joint venture with Siemens and selling its smartphone unit.

Essentially, Nokia’s fortunes turned at just the right time – it was selling an extremely unprofitable unit just after gaining a newly profitable unit.

Come 2016, Nokia will face the choice of whether it wants to reenter the smartphone market. But that decision probably doesn’t have an obvious answer, even though it may seem like the company wants to get back in the game with the release of the Z Launcher. In fact, the reality of the marketplace may actually indicate that the products Nokia was previously known for may not financially benefit the company going forward.

Android is still an uncompetitive landscape, with Samsung dominating sales despite quality hardware from competitors such as HTC, a company facing significant financial difficulties. HTC’s stock has plummeted from a high of $43 per share in 2011 to its current cost per share of $4.33. And while HTC’s struggles may not be indicative of the Android market as a whole, no other manufacturer has come close to challenging Samsung. In other words, if Nokia wants to become an Android manufacturer, the problem Elop saw before still exists: It takes tremendous resources and the necessary businesses to truly become a top-tier player.

If Nokia wants to return to the smartphone hardware market, it’s probably not going to roar back as expected. The Z Launcher is the equivalent of dipping a toe to test the waters – it certainly doesn’t mean Nokia reentering the market is a foregone conclusion. 

Why T-Mobile botched their response to the FTC filing, and how they can fix it

Why T-Mobile botched their response to the FTC filing, and how they can fix it

On July 1st, it was reported that the FTC had filed a lawsuit against T-Mobile accusing the company of cramming false charges into its customers’ bills, a process which has allegedly earned them “hundreds of millions of dollars.” According to the suit, the practices took place from 2009 to 2013, and included fees from horoscope and celebrity gossip texting services, which many customers didn’t even order. Now, the FTC wants T-Mobile to pay restitution to its customers for the years of false billings -- and unsurprisingly, the company is fighting it tooth and nail.

T-Mobile CEO John Legere was appointed in late 2012, and since then the company has taken a radical new direction. Once a tiny competitor to industry giants like Verizon and AT&T, Legere revitalized not only T-Mobile’s business practices but their public image as well; branding the provider as an outspoken advocate for consumer rights, and even sticking the company’s neck out with its ‘Un-carrier’ plan, which, amongst other things, dropped contracts, overage fees, and even early termination fees. The revamp earned T-Mobile significant praise, and for some, even put the company in the running as a direct competitor to larger service providers.

But T-Mobile’s response to the FTC’s filing was absent of the goodwill which they had shown the world in the past year. Legere issued a statement to the FTC suit -- which, again, only wants T-Mobile to pay back the money it had fraudulently charged -- calling the filing “sensationalized,” as well as “unfounded and without merit.” The full statement does little more than deflect the claims, instead choosing to target other service providers and boast T-Mobile’s “commitment to consumers” which it has worked so hard to develop.

T-Mobile is fighting harder than any of the carriers to change the way the wireless industry operates and we are disappointed that the FTC has chosen to file this action against the most pro-consumer company in the industry rather than the real bad actors.

Legere’s response was little more than adolescent whataboutism, something you might expect a small child to say after he was caught by his parents doing something he shouldn’t have. “But those other companies did it too! Why am I being punished?” Instead of taking responsibility and owning up to the fraudulent charges, Legere and T-Mobile decided to redirect blame. The tactic is laughably transparent, and in the long run it will bring the company a tremendous amount of trouble -- far more so than if they actually owned up to their actions. The entire ‘Un-carrier’ name they’ve built over the past year? The suit might not destroy it entirely, but it will undo a great deal of the work Legere and T-Mobile have put in.

It’s hard to stop the train of bad press now, but T-Mobile can still rectify it. The alleged billing policy happened from 2009 to 2013, and Legere only became CEO in late 2012. That means it was put in place by his predecessor, far before the ‘Un-carrier’ was even imagined, and far before T-Mobile had reinvented themselves as a pro-consumer company. Legere could easily take responsibility while still distancing himself and his company from the practice. A simple acknowledgement would easily do the trick -- then a reference to T-Mobile’s commitment to progress, and to making things right with the customer. The non-specific “hundreds of millions of dollars” claimed by the FTC to be owed would seemingly make a large dent in T-Mobile’s funds, but that number shrinks in significance considering how much the company has grown in 2013 alone: 4.4 million new customers, and a revenue of $24.42 billion. With a savvy legal team, the potential restitutions could be argued down even more. And the goodwill provided by a proactive move to make things right? Innumerable.

As it stands, T-Mobile’s corporate spewings are still very distant from the image they’ve built on the public end of business. While they may say that they’re pro-consumer, the company is still like any other telecommunications giant at its core. But Legere and the rest of the corporate team can change that with a few simple actions, and launch a pro-consumer track record that supports all the hype they’ve created on the frontend.

Microsoft wants you to have less hardware

Microsoft wants you to have less hardware, more productivity

During the past week at Microsoft’s Worldwide Partner Conference, between the sessions and the keynotes, the goals of the company came into a focus a bit more - or at least, one specific objective of these goals.

Microsoft thinks we have too many devices. We often have two phones, one for work, and one for personal. Two PCs, one for work and one for personal use and the same for tablets, if your company deploys them. It was thought that this need for several devices might go away with BYOD (bring your own device) but alas, this shift does not yet appear to have alleviated the need for multiple work and personal devices.

Satya Nadella and others touched on this by saying that you shouldn’t have to sacrifice your productivity because the device you are using is not supported by your employer or that your work device can’t access your personal documents. Microsoft has made it clear that they are the company that helps you get things done and with their new initiative of having software on every platform, that reality is coming into focus.

Nadella said that Microsoft will shine in productivity experiences and this means that every platform from Android to Windows will be able to enjoy premium Microsoft experiences. Of course, we expect Microsoft to promote that Windows ecosystem as offering the best experience but those on Android, iOS and Mac will not have a second-class experience either.

But how will Microsoft take these experiences and blend the line between work and play? Well, that is still a work in process but we can start to see these barriers breaking down with Office on the iPad. During WPC, Microsoft showed off how in Excel on the iPad, data can only be pasted into applications that support the rights management for that software. Specifically, they showed how you could not paste company Excel data in to the mail client that ships with iOS, without the proper permissions on your device.

The point of that demo was to show how even on an iPad, Microsoft is able to secure your data. While not a perfect example of one iPad for both personal and business use, you can start to see the foundation of how digital rights management can work to secure corporate data without having to take over the entire iPad.

Per our conversation with Microsoft employees during the week, they know that the path ahead to deliver on this initiative is not an overnight project. It will take years to perfect the model and more importantly, to get consumers and corporations to buy into this model.

Besides, does anyone really like having to carry around multiple devices that are only separated by rights management? The answer to that question is typically ‘no’ and it’s a problem that Microsoft has the capability to fix and is working on the solution. It's not unheard of to see someone having two devices, both from the exact same vendor in their pockets but because one device is for work and can't have personal data on it; it's a silly problem that can be fixed.

Expect to see small nuances that targets this multi-device problem showing up in future products but the biggest challenge is that it’s not simply getting one application to support this model, it’s getting every application by all vendors to support this goal. While that’s not an easy task, it has to start somewhere and Microsoft is pushing ahead with its own products.

Surface Pro 2 in the workplace: Insights from a small deployment

Surface Pro 2 in the workplace: Insights from a small deployment

Microsoft pitches the Surface Pro as an uber-productivity device but just how well does it perform in a corporate setting? Can the Surface find a place alongside desktops and laptops and how do those more used to iPads & Windows 7 receive it?

Here I will be sharing some of my experiences with evaluating Windows 8 Tablets and deploying Surface Pro. A journey that starts with Windows 8 on Atom devices and ends at the Surface Pro 2 in use with a select group of highly mobile users.

The road to choosing a new type of device

For mobile users, the size, weight and battery life of a device are everything. When looking at these requirements, at the extreme end, we discovered that choices were surprisingly limited.

Ultrabooks and ultra-portables, while fantastic for consumers, can end up feeling quite large for business users to cart around all day. Many of these machines still come with a hefty power pack that adds further to the weight. What was needed was a device that could be carried easily from meeting to meeting or thrown in a bag with little penalty.

Many highly mobile users put expectations of size and performance of a new device in line with that of the iPad. Currently the iPad just can’t replace a PC for standard requirements such as network drives, LAN connectivity, network printing and access to traditional business applications. Strapping a keyboard to an iPad does not turn it into a fully-featured laptop. The arrival of Windows 8, finally gave rise to some interesting choices for tablets and convertible PCs so it was time to look at those.

As will be the case for most businesses, historic applications, manageability, security and integration with our existing infrastructure were highly important.


Evaluating Windows tablets

When looking at the initial range of Windows 8 tablets, on paper the Atom-based devices from HP (ElitePad) and Lenovo (ThinkPad Tablet 2) offered a compelling set of features in iPad-sized packages. They're small and light, with all-day battery life and optional add-on docks can turn them into a desktop solutions. The dock proves key to productivity, as the simple act of plugging in a screen, mouse, and keyboard changes the device usability drastically. A nice aspect to these machines was that both had a 3G modem baked in. These machines really provided a "tablet first" experience but were then transformed when docked.

Unfortunately, despite high hopes, these machines had problems with slow internal storage compounded by a paltry 2GB memory. For light use they were fine, but they couldn’t keep up when doing heavy lifting. There would be times where the machines would simply grind to a halt. These performance snarl-ups happened under normal conditions and sometimes when seemingly nothing was open or running.



HP ElitePad in various configurations

Whilst these machines were the perfect size, it quickly became apparent that the keyboard options were problematic. The ElitePad has no kickstand and required a separate Bluetooth keyboard for use on the go. We tested the Microsoft Wedge keyboard as it has a nifty cover that doubles as an adjustable tablet stand. The ThinkPad was as problematic, but for different reasons. Whilst it did have a keyboard/stand option it was small, lacked a trackpad or trackpoint and its viewing angle was fixed too upright. Ugh, both devices were a world of compromises and workarounds, and ultimately just extra stuff to carry around.

Performance proved a little precarious for a professional machine and the low internal storage (64GB) was a concern for the long run. With all this in mind, focus turned to the Surface Pro 2.

Surface Pro 2 evaluation begins..

Evaluating the Surface Pro 2

Whilst not as svelte as the other Windows tablets, the Surface Pro 2 does offer up a serious mix of performance and features in a compact package. The Surface ticked many of our boxes: an adjustable kickstand, clip-on keyboard and pen input. Laptop class performance is packed in too, with healthy amounts of RAM and speedy, high capacity SSD options. This was more a tablet-size Ultrabook than netbook packed into a tablet form factor. Boxes were also ticked for “bagable” and "dockable" with a good range of accessories and add-ons to boot.

Unlike the under performing Atom machines we looked at, the Surface Pro could churn through serious workloads. Without ever needing to kick in the internal fan, it can handle almost anything you'll throw at it. So much so that performance has often been better than some Ultrabooks that we tested alongside. Pen input from the Wacom digitizer is excellent and outperforms the dreadful options that were provided with the Lenovo and HP tablets.

The thickness of the Surface Pro 2 is unfortunate as it feels a tad chunky and dense. It lacks a 3g/4g option, but tethering is the savior for mobile users. If you have a Windows Phone you can set up on demand tethering which is quite useful.

At launch, Microsoft announced a dock and focused on the device providing a real desktop working experience. The dock gives the Surface the ability to drive multiple monitors - along with a decent range of USB ports, and of course networking - in a nice neat package.


How well does the Surface Pro 2 play in the workplace?

For the most part, it behaves just as a Windows 7 machine will, happily accepting and applying key group policies and working well with network printers. Very little needed to change to plug in and get going. From an applications compatibility perspective, we were already in the midst of rolling out Office 365 which works beautifully with Windows 8. Anti-virus needed to be updated to a version that was Windows 8 compliant and our VPN solution needed a backend update for Windows 8 connections.

The machine is of course fully TPM compliant, so if you have Group Policy in place for BitLocker Drive Encryption it will work in the same way as Windows 7. Bitlocker encryption on Windows 8 combined with an SSD is a far more pleasant experience. Trust me.



Windows 8 isn’t without its own set of new complexities though. The operating system remains architecturally split between desktop and WinRT. With that comes oddities when using the device on a corporate LAN. The Modern/Metro apps have problems with authenticated proxy servers so unless you’re willing to whitelist a long list of websites, many, if not all metro apps won’t work properly.

In testing, that meant the core apps like Mail and Calendar do not work reliably. Creating a blanket policy for common Microsoft services so Modern apps can work through an authenticated proxy was not desirable. Windows 8.1 did seem to improve things a little but it still does not work as you’d expect - often apps show up warnings about no internet connection or just stop working.

While actually getting on with real work normally involves the desktop, this isn’t catastrophic but it does introduce a scenario where thinking is required about which apps to use depending on whether you’re connected to the LAN or working on open connections.

A common complaint that affects Windows in general is that switching between a work connection and an open Internet connection is tedious. Simply, when on the LAN you’ll generally have to route your traffic through a proxy server; when off the network you’ll need to switch that proxy connection off.

It’s now 2014 and still Windows does not provide decent options for handling this automatically, even if the network stack is fully aware when it is connected to a trusted work network via LAN or not. With so many connection options available these days, it’s time Microsoft addressed the complexity.


Reception to hybrid computing on the Surface with Windows 8

With Windows 8.1, Microsoft has done much to improve the user experience to make it more intuitive. In deploying Windows 8 on the Surface to users, careful thought should be given to initial setup. Thought will need to be given to how Windows Store apps will be purchased - will you advise users to connect their personal Microsoft account to the machine or set up a new one?

Due to the new way of working with a Windows 8 machine, initial delivery and setup of a machine does require some form of introduction. Microsoft has gone some way towards providing a few hints, but a bit of hands-on time with a user is essential unless you want to leave them to stumble through gesture discovery and general navigation.

Provided this initial introduction is completed, reception to Windows 8 and the Surface Pro 2 has been overwhelmingly positive. Where it was not possible, for various reasons, to coach users through those initial steps, the reaction was overall far more negative. The tendency for Microsoft to hide menus and rely on gestures for actions means there remains an extended learning curve, which some do not have the time or the patience for, especially on a work machine.

Before the arrival of Windows 8.1 the amount of work needed to induct someone into using the Surface was more time consuming. Those early adopters have been delighted to see common sense UI items now rolled into Windows 8.1. The promise of finally getting the desktop Start menu back genuinely has folks excited.

Surface hardware and accessories: Microsoft as a device supplier

In creating the Surface line of machines Microsoft, finally, became involved in the whole process of creating and supplying a PC. With that comes hardware development, support, customer communication and more. Make no mistake: Microsoft is still learning how to do this and ramping up their efforts.

The engineers have done amazing work with the Surface Pro 2, managing to pry every little bit of performance out of the hardware. This has meant that everything from the UEFI firmware to drivers and patches was modified in the quest for perfecting the machine. Seeing just how far Microsoft was willing to go with formulating a new device type is impressive.

Due to the deep-level tweaking, this has meant that at times the Surface has appeared to be a little... shall we say, temperamental in everyday use (especially in the early days). Worthy of note is the Surface Pro’s tendency to drop into a coma rather than sleeping, meaning it just won’t wake up. This problem certainly migrated to the 'sometimes' category but it’s still there from time to time.

Issues around the docking station remain, including times when external screens will not be recognized and the LAN connection simply disappears. Sometimes, removal of drivers is required as well as unplugging the dock from power. Over time these issues have mostly subsided and credit to the Surface team for providing a constant stream of hardware related fixes, but they need to keep them coming. Some issues have simply taken too long to solve; some issues with hardware simply don’t exist on other devices from traditional PC makers.

That the Surface Pro 2 has had these problems from day one, and required constant updates to improve reliability is perhaps more surprising considering the device is made by Microsoft to showcase its hardware and software. I cannot help but think that too much low level tinkering was done at the expense of reliability for the Surface Pro devices.

If you are thinking of deploying Surface then you’ll be pleased to hear that Microsoft does provide regular driver and firmware updates into packs for the creation of images for larger scale projects.

Concerning Microsoft’s ability to supply and support their hardware, experiences have been patchy. Despite the announcement for docking stations, in the UK they never materialized into units being available to order. The UK Microsoft site had them listed for months but then quietly removed the entry without any explanation. Our main supplier was repeatedly told differing dates until no date could be given. Communication around availability with customers was both misleading and frustrating, creating a situation where we needed to

Range of accessories in US store

Microsoft still seems to struggle with properly delivering and supporting their devices outside of the US. The range of accessories available from the Microsoft Store in the US was at least double than that in the UK. Better attention to detail needs to be given to consistent delivery of announced products and clear messaging on product timelines and end-of-life warnings.

Range of accessories in UK store

With the arrival of the Surface Pro 3, Microsoft is effectively winding down hardware inventory for Surface Pro 2 devices and accessories. Many of the accessories for the Surface Pro 2 are now missing from Microsoft’s online store or drying up at other suppliers. This is a very short life cycle for a professional product and we’d have liked to see MS support Surface Pro 2 with improved keyboard options and accessories over time rather than simply ditching development.

Hardware consistency is of paramount importance when deploying machines - especially for businesses. As such, it’s worth noting that the change to the design of the power connector renders previous chargers incompatible with newer devices. From a consumer standpoint, this is not such a big deal, but for business users these power adaptors provide a never-ending source of problems from being lost or just needing a spare. Looking at pro machines from HP, Lenovo and Apple power connectors hardly ever change; the same approach would be appreciated from Microsoft.

The overall experience of the users

Running a small test deployment always presents challenges, and with Surface Pro 2 and Windows 8 this has been somewhat of an epic. With a constantly evolving software base combined with a regular set of driver and firmware changes, this meant that a great deal of intervention was required.

What I can report is that - despite a few gripes about the chunky nature of the Surface Pro 2 and its lack of built-in mobile data option for 3G/4G connectivity - the reaction has been great. The machines do provide a small form factor, which fits into a small bag or can be carried from meeting to meeting with ease. Also of note is that many have embraced the device for its mixing of work and home functionality, appreciating the content consumption apps interwoven with a full-blown work experience.

The TypeCover II keyboard is one area that almost everyone agreed on as being the weakest part of the Surface experience. From the limited travel of the keys to the material textured trackpad it’s just not the best it could be. When looking at the Surface Pro 2, the touch cover option wasn’t considered suitable for evaluation due to the lack of physical feedback. Despite much talk of the keyboard being less than suitable for lap use, this has not proved to be a major complaint.

The choice of materials for the Surface keyboards also seem too cosmetic with worn out keys and grubby marks appearing very quickly. More could have been done (and can still be done, MS!) to usher in a replacement for this accessory. Pointing to the Surface Pro 3 is not the solution we’re looking for.

The first batch of our Surface Pro 2 machines were deployed using HP USB 3.0 port replicators. These proved quite messy from a cabling perspective, and for the most part a bit temperamental. These port replicators have improved over time with the maturation of the DisplayLink drivers for Windows 8. From a user perspective, they were messy and had a tendency to be delicate with USB cable placement making it very sensitive to movements.

With the arrival of the official Surface dock, things changed radically. As well as being a slick docking experience, the desk could be cleared of cables. It’s just much easier to clasp the unit into place around the device rather than search about for power and USB connectors each time. The Surface dock also provides a more reliable experience when using external displays.

Feedback on performance of the Surface Pro 2 has been excellent. The machine has a good CPU and a fast SSD meaning it boots almost instantly and chews through heavy office work - no complaints there. Battery life is also superb and for many it can put out a good work day's worth of on-the-go use without needing a recharge.


Interestingly, the ability to ink using the stylus has been somewhat ignored by most. This could be due to requiring some training on scenarios or simply that the Surface Pro 2 is too big and heavy for it to be used in the hands with the pen (Surface Mini anyone?).

Out of the small group, a few machines were returned outright, mostly due to the complexity of tackling the interface. Almost certainly, Windows 8 (pre 8.1) was to blame, along with some all-too-brief training at early stages. The very nature of the separation of the two environments remains problematic for many. The outright failures with the small group perhaps shine light onto the issues more around Windows 8 rather than the Surface Pro as a device.

On the other extreme end, a self-proclaimed skeptic of Microsoft and its products admitted to being completely won over by the Surface Pro 2, so much so that they would buy one personally.


Final Words

The Surface Pro 2 has eventually matured into a software and hardware solution that almost nobody else can match. The road to this point though, has been long and rather too turbulent for a second-generation device designed to highlight the best of Microsoft. Whilst noble to tinker with every aspect of the hardware, I cannot help think that they skirted too close to the edge of the performance/reliability envelope.

The Surface Pro 3 is now here and soon it (and the dock!) will be available in the UK. Some clear and upfront messaging from Microsoft on the future roadmap of Surface, and some solidifying of certain hardware aspects, are essential if the company wishes to become more widely adopted in the workplace. In particular, I’d like to see standard connector positioning which will allow for a stable hardware platform to begin being adopted for accessories.

Like the Surface Pro 2, the newer Pro 3 has already seen some rapid updates to its firmware and core drivers. It is a concern to hear that reliability is still not where it should be on this third-generation machine, which is a shame, as the Surface Pro 2 is now stable. More concerning were the seemingly final frantic updates deployed hours ahead of the release just to correct some glaring issues.

Microsoft has made some puzzling decisions around Surface development. Instead of a larger Surface I’d have welcomed just a slimmer Surface and, yes, one that can use the same dock, keyboards and power supplies. Odd too that even the third-gen device does not have a mobile data option either and it’s still based on the same CPU as the previous model. The Surface Pro 3 appears technically premature whilst we're on the cusp of the fanless next-gen Intel launch - why not wait?

As it stands, the Surface line-up is excellent and I believe it can make some serious inroads into certain segments of the business market. Unfortunately, releases have been slightly hampered by poor communication, patchy availability and an overall sense that Microsoft treats this product as more of a hobby than a serious endeavor. In order to be taken more seriously, there is work still to be done to improve distribution, messaging and hardware consistency.

The Surface Pro range does occupy a unique niche as an Ultrabook/tablet replacement, especially where size, power and flexibility are major concerns. I’ll certainly be evaluating the latest model, but will be looking to see more positive performance and signaling from the Surface team before taking the plunge on stage two rollouts.

If you've had experience of deploying Windows 8 tablets in your workplace, we’d like to hear from you.