<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Microsoft’s Ballmer drops clues on Surface pricing and what’s ahead</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gigaom.com/2012/09/16/microsofts-ballmer-drops-clues-on-surface-pricing-and-whats-ahead/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/09/16/microsofts-ballmer-drops-clues-on-surface-pricing-and-whats-ahead/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 May 2013 11:50:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Allen Moshiri</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/09/16/microsofts-ballmer-drops-clues-on-surface-pricing-and-whats-ahead/#comment-1012406</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Allen Moshiri]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Sep 2012 16:27:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=563274#comment-1012406</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Microsoft just does not get it! Their &#039;Surface&#039; is a hybrid between a tablet and an Ultra book. If I want the keyboard functionality I should and would pull out a real computing device that can do more than just typing. What is the difference in Microsoft&#039;s Approach and phones that have a touch screen as well as a keyboard? As it stands tablets are great &amp;  convenient but are not and were not meant to function like a traditional computer. They are light on both the hardware and software side, with advent of Apps why should you need a keyboard, what happened to the concept of simplicity?
 
The two chief reasons Microsoft&#039;s attempt at the tablet market looks they way it does are;

A- Even they admit on their official Surface site that &#039;Some functions require a Keyboard&#039;. Well what could you expect from the creators of &#039;DOS&#039; operating system, Microsoft is still in the dark ages. There are no innovative coming out of Microsoft but a kick-stand!

B- The keyboard is meant to appeal to people who have not made the transition to a touch pad or find it difficult to use, this pool is getting smaller and smaller by the day.

Its going to be back to drawing board for Microsoft. The good news is that there is plenty of ingenuity out there that is making Microsoft irreverent by the day.   

This comment was written by Allen Moshiri a life long Computing &amp; Technology veteran, who has worked on every platform Microsoft has ever produced.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Microsoft just does not get it! Their &#8216;Surface&#8217; is a hybrid between a tablet and an Ultra book. If I want the keyboard functionality I should and would pull out a real computing device that can do more than just typing. What is the difference in Microsoft&#8217;s Approach and phones that have a touch screen as well as a keyboard? As it stands tablets are great &amp;  convenient but are not and were not meant to function like a traditional computer. They are light on both the hardware and software side, with advent of Apps why should you need a keyboard, what happened to the concept of simplicity?</p>
<p>The two chief reasons Microsoft&#8217;s attempt at the tablet market looks they way it does are;</p>
<p>A- Even they admit on their official Surface site that &#8216;Some functions require a Keyboard&#8217;. Well what could you expect from the creators of &#8216;DOS&#8217; operating system, Microsoft is still in the dark ages. There are no innovative coming out of Microsoft but a kick-stand!</p>
<p>B- The keyboard is meant to appeal to people who have not made the transition to a touch pad or find it difficult to use, this pool is getting smaller and smaller by the day.</p>
<p>Its going to be back to drawing board for Microsoft. The good news is that there is plenty of ingenuity out there that is making Microsoft irreverent by the day.   </p>
<p>This comment was written by Allen Moshiri a life long Computing &amp; Technology veteran, who has worked on every platform Microsoft has ever produced.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Christopher William Crawley</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/09/16/microsofts-ballmer-drops-clues-on-surface-pricing-and-whats-ahead/#comment-1000249</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Christopher William Crawley]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Sep 2012 05:29:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=563274#comment-1000249</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[So thats what the Apollios.com and I will look like in 10 years TY Steve!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So thats what the Apollios.com and I will look like in 10 years TY Steve!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rdx2</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/09/16/microsofts-ballmer-drops-clues-on-surface-pricing-and-whats-ahead/#comment-999997</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rdx2]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Sep 2012 22:33:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=563274#comment-999997</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[also needs a 16GB version at $250 to kick start sales and app development]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>also needs a 16GB version at $250 to kick start sales and app development</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill Reilly</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/09/16/microsofts-ballmer-drops-clues-on-surface-pricing-and-whats-ahead/#comment-999992</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bill Reilly]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Sep 2012 22:23:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=563274#comment-999992</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[32 GB Surface RT = $300
64 GB Surface RT = $400
64 GB Surface Pro = $600
128GB Surface Pro = $800

How&#039;s that look to you?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>32 GB Surface RT = $300<br />
64 GB Surface RT = $400<br />
64 GB Surface Pro = $600<br />
128GB Surface Pro = $800</p>
<p>How&#8217;s that look to you?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Yacko</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/09/16/microsofts-ballmer-drops-clues-on-surface-pricing-and-whats-ahead/#comment-999967</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Yacko]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Sep 2012 22:00:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=563274#comment-999967</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Not one price. Different price points for memory or configuration options.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not one price. Different price points for memory or configuration options.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Harvey Lubin</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/09/16/microsofts-ballmer-drops-clues-on-surface-pricing-and-whats-ahead/#comment-999732</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Harvey Lubin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Sep 2012 17:43:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=563274#comment-999732</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The price will be somewhere between $300 and $800.

Well that really narrows things down to a final price. ;-)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The price will be somewhere between $300 and $800.</p>
<p>Well that really narrows things down to a final price. ;-)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff Putz</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/09/16/microsofts-ballmer-drops-clues-on-surface-pricing-and-whats-ahead/#comment-999620</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jeff Putz]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Sep 2012 15:24:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=563274#comment-999620</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The ranking system never adversely affected me while I was at Microsoft, but I could see in other groups how it was toxic. It forces you to pick winners on a team of losers, and losers on a team of winners. It ignores team performance entirely. Additionally, you end up having some orgs with a whole lot of promoted people not adding value. I love the company dearly, but I wish they&#039;d ditch that system and let managers decide how each person fits for who they are.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The ranking system never adversely affected me while I was at Microsoft, but I could see in other groups how it was toxic. It forces you to pick winners on a team of losers, and losers on a team of winners. It ignores team performance entirely. Additionally, you end up having some orgs with a whole lot of promoted people not adding value. I love the company dearly, but I wish they&#8217;d ditch that system and let managers decide how each person fits for who they are.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
