The hardware is outstanding

The hardware is on par with, if not better than, the MacBook Air I owned prior. The design is industrial and pleasing with no extras to take away from the look and feel; no cooling vents are visible, for example. Just a few ports adorn the sides: a pair of USBs, a mini DisplayPort and a microSD card slot. The speakers are hidden under the keyboard and are among they best I’ve heard on a laptop. At 3.35 pounds, the Pixel is near the top end of weight that I’d want to carry around, but I don’t find it too heavy.

Google did a great job with the keyboard and, in particular, the trackpad. The island keys are well laid out and this device is a joy to type on. The top row of special keys — Refresh, Full Screen, volume and brightness, for example — are harder to press, making them more like buttons, but that helps mitigate accidental key strikes. The etched glass trackpad is superb and supports multitouch gestures, such as two-fingered scrolling.

Then there’s the bright, pixel-packed screen that I can’t take my eyes off. Yes, the 2560 x 1700 resolution is similar to the Retina Displays found on Apple’s latest MacBook Pro laptops, but it just looks better to my eyes. I can’t be sure if it’s the default fonts, the way Chrome OS handles resolution doubling or what. I’ve made several side by side comparisons to my wife’s 15-inch MacBook Pro laptop with Retina Display and in every test, the Pixel simply looks better to me.

The Pixel’s display is also a touch screen although I don’t find myself using touch for interaction all that much. On occasional, I’ll dab at the screen to tap a button or a link, or to scroll a web page, but not often. I wish Google had introduced a non-touchscreen version for maybe $200 less as there’s little need for the feature at this time. That could change if Google brings support for touch-optimized Android apps, however.

Performance-wise, the device offers the fastest experience on the web I’ve seen yet. The 1.8 GHz Intel Core i5 processor paired with 4 GB of memory easily keep up with my all day usage requirements. The device boots in seconds and wakes instantaneously: You simply open it and get to work. The HD camera is outstanding for video chats. I do wish the 59 wHr battery lasted longer than 5 hours, however.

Let’s talk software and limitations

First, some clarification on the Chromebook Pixel can and can’t do since the most common misconception is that “it’s just a browser.” Yes, the Pixel runs Chrome OS, which uses the Chrome browser as its main interface. But that browser runs on a Linux kernel and that gives Google some opportunity to flesh out the experience a little more.

There’s a full-fledged File Manager that integrates local and cloud storage for example, as well as a standalone music player and video player; these all work offline. A basic photo editor is included. There’s support for Google Docs, which also works offline. There’s a Camera app for taking pictures, although I haven’t seen much use for it. Essentially, the basics of an operating system are  here and sometimes, that’s all you need.

In fact, I’d argue that less is more in this case: I’m far more focused when using the Pixel then when using a device with various third-party applications. It’s the same reason we opted not to get a navigation system in our Chevy Volt when we bought it in November: It was adding more buttons and complications that we simply didn’t want or need on our drive.

It’s true you can’t install native software apps on the Pixel. Is that a problem? For two reasons it isn’t, at least not for me. First, all of my work is done in a browser: Research, blog posts, online classes, social networking, email, and general content consumption. I’ve had no problems doing what I want on the Pixel, which includes watching online video from Amazon and Netflix, enjoying live out-of-market NHL games, writing dozens of articles, etc….

For the few times I’ve wanted to play a game that wasn’t web-based, I simply turned to a device I already have (and one you likely do too): a smartphone or a tablet. I’m getting my app fix from those devices now and using the Pixel for everything else.

Second, it’s easy to install another operating system on the Pixel. Using a simple set of instructions made available by David Schneider at Google, I run Linux as needed on the Pixel; at the same time I’m running Chrome OS!

From an end-user perspective, this is little different than running Windows in a virtual machine on a Mac; and it’s actually faster to set up. This allows me to install third-party apps as needed: Skype, Audacity, Gimp or whatever else that can’t be done on the web.

Can you live a web-based life?

Chances are that most of you already live in a browser too but there are still a few activities where you prefer a third-party app. But living the web life isn’t as bad as it sounds; in fact, it’s a far better experience than it was in the past. Back in 2008, I took a 60-day web challenge, bypassing all third-party apps (save the browser) and living to tell about it. In fact, I found it actually fun to find web-based solutions for my various needs and still do.

That’s where Chrome web extensions come in today. I routinely use several on a daily basis as these mini-apps help overcome some browser limitations. The Any.DO extension manages and syncs my active tasks, a Pocket extension fires links to my offline reading list and Evernote’s Clearly extension removes the crap from a web page to let the content shine through. Extensions are only the beginning, however. Google is working on Native Client, an effort that will allow native code to run in the browser, as well as Packaged Apps, which it describes as:

“Just like web apps, packaged apps are written in HTML5, JavaScript, and CSS. But packaged apps look and behave like native apps, and they have native-like capabilities that are much more powerful than those available to web apps.”

It’s true that a future filled with apps using either of technologies is just that for now: A possible future. So the best way to see if you can live with just the web is simply to try it. Use your existing computer with just the browser for a week and find out. I think one needs to give it at least that much time because this isn’t a transition most can make in just a day. If it doesn’t work out, you’re no worse for wear, but if it does, maybe a Chromebook could meet your needs.

So: Wi-Fi or LTE?

After test driving the LTE model of the Chromebook Pixel, I opted to spend the extra $150 for that model. Instead of paying $1,299 for the Wi-Fi edition then, I ordered the $1,449 Pixel. The premium nets the integrated LTE radio, 100 MB of included LTE service each month with the option for pay-as-you-go broadband as needed, and 64 GB of local storage, which is double that of the cheaper model. Both devices benefit from 1 terabyte of Google Drive storage for three years and 12 free GoGo in-flight sessions.

The LTE radio can sometimes take a good 15 seconds to grab a Verizon signal — particularly when waking the device — but overall, having integrated connectivity for the times when Wi-Fi can’t be found is worth it to me. My LTE smartphone uses AT&T’s network and can be a hotspot, so I essentially have three ways to keep the Pixel connected: Wi-Fi hotspots, AT&T’s LTE network from my phone (which is already paid for each month) and Verizon’s LTE network as a last resort add-on.

Without a doubt, $1,449 is a seemingly high price to pay. I’ve been using a $450 Chromebook for nearly a year so the question in my mind is: Does the Pixel represent a 3x boost in experience over my lower priced Chromebook? For me it does: It’s at least 3x as fast, includes mobile broadband connectivity, comes with 10 times the cloud storage and has a screen that looks magnitudes better.

It’s all about the future and change

When I think about the Pixel, I can’t help but be reminded of a key GigaOM mantra. “Broadband is the processor,” is one of the big themes my colleague Om Malik had when starting the blog back in 2006. Indeed, if it weren’t for broadband — first wired and later wireless — we wouldn’t have the portable computing products that are so popular and in widespread use today.

No platform I can think of exemplifies this thought any better: Using web technologies as a front-end interface is the heart and soul of Google’s Chromebook Pixel. And because I’ve embraced this thought, and the experience it brings, the Chromebook Pixel with LTE is the best device for how I work. It’s not for everyone – I’d never say otherwise — but it just might surprise you if you take one for a test drive.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

Here’s a quick tour of the hardware including that 4.3 million pixel display. We have a 15-inch MacBook Pro Retina Display in the house and to my eyes, the screen of the Chromebook Pixel looks even better although that’s hard to translate in a video. The internal speakers are outstanding as well as I tried to demonstrate on camera. Unfortunately, my video camera is “smart” enough to level out the sound, so you’ll have to take my word for it.

Outside of the occasional podcast and video production, I have little doubt the Pixel could fulfill all of my mobile computing needs. And it would be a joy to use one of them as well thanks to the Intel Core i5 chip and 4 GB of memory; bench-marking Chrome shows a four- to five-fold performance boost over the Samsung Series 5 550 Chromebook I bought last year.

It’s even slightly faster than Chrome on my similarly spec’d MacBook Air. And unlike most other Chromebooks, no corners were cut: The Pixel’s design and build quality is top notch from the backlit keyboard to piano hinge that doubles as a heat sink.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Life After Chrome: What’s Next for Android
• Survey: How apps can solve photo management
• Analyzing the wearable computing market

I can’t pass judgement on the device yet since I haven’t actually touched one. Om has, however, and shared his thoughts. I have a loaner Chromebook Pixel en route later today, so I’ll be able to experience it for myself and form a true impression. But on paper, it’s easy to see why many around the web haven’t warmed up to the Pixel: The cost is a huge barrier for a device that can only use the web or web apps. Yes, the 1 TB of included Google Drive storage for two years essentially negates the price of the Pixel, but that’s a hard sell to mainstream consumers.

Is touch for the web really all there is?

The Chromebook Pixel is for “what’s next”, Google claims. Is it? That depends on what’s next, of course! If I had to make an educated guess on what that is, I’d go with support for Android applications on the Chromebook Pixel. We’ve heard Google talk about merging Android and Chrome in the future but it really hasn’t happened as I had expected it to. In my mind, it would bring the one aspect missing with the Pixel right now: support for a vast ecosystem of applications.

I think this for a few reasons. The first is the comment made at the product launch by Sundar Pinchai, senior vice president of Google Chrome: “Web hasn’t had touch and high-resolution screens before.” Sure it has. Pick up a current model Apple iPad or even Google’s own Nexus 10 tablet: With its 2560 x 1600 resolution touchscreen, the Nexus 10 has a higher pixel density than the new Chromebook Pixel. Clearly, the “touch-enabled web” isn’t what’s next, it’s what we have today on millions of devices.

There’s more value for that touchscreen with Android apps

There’s also the value proposition of a Chromebook that starts at $1,299 for the Wi-Fi model and $1,499 for one with integrated LTE radio. I surely expect better performance from the Intel Core i5 powered Pixel over Intel Pentium Chromebooks in the $200 to $450 range. And the high-resolution display will add to the experience as well. But is that really needed for web work and do these “extras” provide $1,000 or more in benefit? I’m not sure about that just yet, even with the free terabyte of Google Drive storage.

What would be an added benefit is taking advantage of that touchscreen with applications. If Google were to add support for the Dalvik VM where Android apps run, the Pixel makes a little more sense to me as a product. Frankly, we don’t need touch on the web for a laptop form factor when multi-gesture trackpads replicate the experience more ergonomically. But if the touchscreen were leveraged for more use cases, that could add value.

Who wins with better web apps vs. who wins with Android apps

Another thought: Google pushing the Pixel as a means to propel web app development doesn’t just benefit Google. Any modern browser with the same support for HTML 5 and other web standards could take advantage of improved web apps. That doesn’t just apply to traditional computers running Mac OS X or Windows, but potentially even mobile devices. Including Android support on the Chromebook Pixel, however, feeds Google — and only Google — more information about users.

Again, I’m not critiquing the Chromebook Pixel device itself here; I’ll do that once I get my hands on one. And I’ll be evaluating it as a current Chromebook user; I’ve tried all prior Chromebook models and bought my own last year.

I want to know if it’s worth the upgrade to a Pixel as a dedicated Chromebook user. At the moment, I’m really trying to understand Google’s strategy with the Pixel because for much less money, I can do everything on my $450 Chromebook outside of touching the screen to interact with the web. Android application support, however, would enable more usage of that touchscreen while offering the ability to do more offline activity on the Pixel.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• 12 tech leaders’ resolutions for 2012
• Life After Chrome: What’s Next for Android
• Google Chrome OS: More and Better Web Apps on The Way?

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not about to excommunicate myself from either the Church of Android or the Loyal Order of iOS. I do, however, like to keep an eye on all of the mobile platforms and device types on the market in order to maintain perspective. You know, the kind of perspective that doesn’t come cheaply: I bought an HP TouchPad, Palm Pre and, about five or six years ago, three different UMPCs. (Those were 7-inch tablets with crappy touch screens and a terrible Windows XP experience.)

What are the choices?

So I started shopping around for a new Windows 8 tablet. I really don’t need the performance of the new Surface Pro or any other similar tablet/laptop combo using an Intel Core i5 chip. There’s little point to spending upwards of $900 or more for one of these, as a result. That leaves me with two main paths: a Windows RT device using an ARM processor or a Windows 8 unit with an Intel Atom chip.

And that brings me back to something I wrote last month, which my experience with the Acer W510 only solidified. The only reason I can think of to purchase a Windows RT device is the price difference. That same thought was alluded to on Twitter by Steve Paine — a long-time friend from my old UMPC days — who runs a great set of sites devoted to tablets and ultrabooks.

@KevinCTofel @MobileHG Where do you see an advantage in having RT instead of Win 8 on Clovertrail Kevin? Price?—
Steve 'Chippy' Paine (@chippy) February 12, 2013

Aside from the slightly lower cost of entry, what other reason is there to pick Windows RT? I wish there more reasons, but I’m not seeing them. And that’s disappointing because when Microsoft announced it would be working with partners for Windows on ARM, I was among those who were thrilled. (Of course, I bought a TouchPad, so what do I know?)

The app store may be more important than the device price

I do know that the application situation for Windows RT isn’t much better now than it was a month or two ago. I also know that I can get roughly the same battery life on an Intel Atom powered Windows 8 device as I can with a Windows RT tablet. I also get my choice of browser and the ability to run full Windows apps with the Intel device. Here’s a summary of the decision process from my post last month; I’ve already ruled out option No. 3 for reasons stated above:

It’s a simple scenario, really. Consumers have three choices when it comes to Windows tablets. They can buy

1. ARM-based: A Windows RT tablet for around $500 that has acceptable performance, a Desktop limited to Microsoft Office use, no support for legacy software and a device that runs for about 10 hours on a charge.
2. Intel Atom-based: A Windows 8 tablet for around $500 that has slightly better performance, no desktop or software installation limitations and runs for 8 to 10 hours on a charge.
3. Intel Core-based: A windows 8 tablet for around $900 that offers the best performance, has no desktop or software installation limitations and runs for 4 to 5 hours on a charge.

See the problem? For roughly the same price, consumers can choose between options 1 and 2. Any benefits of running Windows on an ARM processor — at current device prices — simply isn’t there.

As I was shopping around online to check out what’s available, I did stumble upon one deal that had my finger hovering on the “buy” button: Amazon has the Asus VivoTab RT and docking keyboard –with included secondary battery — for $481.

That’s a steep discount from a few months ago when Asus launched the device. And it’s less than the $709 a 64 GB Acer W510 with similar keyboard goes for on Amazon. But the app situation for Windows RT was a good reality check and I passed on the deal. It’s just too limiting for what I want and price was the only reason I might have gone for it.

Too many limitations for Windows RT for me right now

Ironically, an earlier story from today adds a little more clarity to the issue. Bluestacks launched a Windows 8 optimized solution that runs Android apps. With it, I’d have access to more than 750,000 Android apps.

The only problem? Bluestacks runs on Intel chips, so Windows RT devices can’t benefit from it. That’s almost ironic considering nearly all of the Android ecosystem is designed to run on ARM chips such as those used for Windows RT.

So the dilemma is this: Is it worth saving a few bucks to go with the limitations of Windows RT? After coming to my senses and passing on the VivoTab deal, I don’t think so.

The only benefit to buying the device would be the lower price than competing, fuller-featured Windows 8 devices. Unless the application situation changes soon, I don’t see how Windows RT can ever be a success at any price, save maybe $199 or less. For the moment, at least for me, the excitement I once felt for Windows RT’s potential is eroding faster than the demise of Palm.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Takeaways from connected consumer’s second quarter
• Where new opportunity lies in the mobile operating system space
• Sector RoadMap: Social customer service in 2013

The device’s little cousin, Surface RT, launched in October to generally mixed reviews and many waited to see what the Pro experience was like. Here’s a roundup from some of the reviews, tweets and comments I’ve seen so far. I’m withholding final judgement on the Surface Pro until I spend time with one myself, of course.

Let’s start with the good

Some of the more positive comments have come from AnandTech, Computerworld and TechCrunch.

AnandTech, which I find always provides some of the best technical reviews of products, says this in the lengthy post:

“If you’re shopping for an Ultrabook today and want that tablet experience as well, Surface Pro really is the best and only choice on the market. If however you do a lot of typing in your lap and in weird positions, a conventional notebook is better suited for you. The same goes for if you’re considering a tablet for reasons like all-day battery life or having something that’s super thin and light.”

Battery life seems to be a common theme of concern with run-times in reviews ranging from just under four hours to approaching six, depending on the usage activities. Late this year, Intel’s next-generation chip should help with that aspect, so for now, road warriors may want to bring their Surface Pro power cord along.

Noted analyst Michael Gartenberg, writing for Computerworld, generally likes what he sees, provided you look at the device for its intended purpose and market:

“I’ve been a Surface Pro user for a few weeks now, and what I have found is that it is the best articulation of Microsoft’s vision for Windows 8 and how the PC and tablet experiences can meld on one device.

“While it might not be the device for the masses, it is the device that points the way for Microsoft’s future.”

Really, that’s what Surface Pro — and Surface RT, to a degree — is all about: Microsoft’s effort to move beyond the legacy ideas of a personal computer and towards the idea that a tablet can be a full PC in a new form factor.

John Biggs at TechCrunch may be the most enthusiastic of the bunch, leaving his MacBook behind for a week and not missing it all that much.

“In short, the Surface Pro is so good that it could drive Windows 8 adoption with enough force to make people reconsider Microsoft’s odd new OS. Microsoft bet the farm on a new paradigm and it needs a champion. Surface Pro is the right hardware for the job.”

A common theme: poor battery life and compromises

Not everyone saw the good amongst the bad, however. Laptop Magazine offers the most negative conclusion I’ve read yet, with Surface Pro earning 2.5 out of 5 stars. The Ultrabook-like performance was welcome, but the device appears to be a jack of two trades and master of neither:

“While we like its design and Core i5 performance, there’s no getting around the fact that an $899, two-pound device with 4.5 hours of battery life is impractical for those who need or want to carry a tablet for extended periods of time. And, as a laptop replacement, the Surface Pro falls short, as both keyboard covers — neither of which are included — simply aren’t as good as a genuine notebook keyboard.”

Tech site Engadget follows suit on the compromise aspect of Surface Pro. Based on their thoughts, it seems the market isn’t ready for a full Windows machine that relies heavily on touch, doesn’t like a hybrid type of device that works as both tablet and laptop or thinks the execution is simply a bad one.

“We’re still completely enraptured by the idea of a full-featured device that can properly straddle the disparate domains of lean-forward productivity and lean-back idleness. Sadly, we’re still searching for the perfect device and OS combo that not only manages both tasks, but excels at them. The Surface Pro comes about as close as we’ve yet experienced, but it’s still compromised at both angles of attack.”

Even noted Microsoft-watcher Mary-Jo Foley is riding the compromise bandwagon over at ZDNet. And that’s interesting to me because Foley owns and likes her lower-powered, less expensive Surface RT. Here’s the takeaway on her view of Surface Pro market appeal:

“I keep scratching my head over who Microsoft expects to buy the Surface Pro. It’s not as good of a tablet, in terms of weight/battery life, as the Surface RT is. But it’s also not as good of a Windows 8 PC as other OEM-produced devices, coming in at lower price points with better battery life and other specs.”

Add it up and what do you get?

So some good reviews, some average reviews and some poor reviews. When you total that up, what do you get? According to a few on Twitter, not much at all and perhaps too much compromise:

So many Surface Pro reviews, so many polite ways to say a device fails.—
Tom Reestman (@treestman) February 06, 2013

If you are looking for a tablet that’s crappier than an iPad and a laptop that’s crappier than an MBA, the Microsoft Surface Pro is for you!—
Paul Haddad (@tapbot_paul) February 06, 2013

Again, I’m not sharing thoughts until I actually use the Surface Pro. But I can’t say I’m surprised by the compromise commentary: Microsoft’s progress has long been held back by its success in the past. By having such a large legacy user-base, any innovation going forward has to appease both new users as well as old. Anytime you try to keep both happy, you’ll likely fall in the middle at best.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Where new opportunity lies in the mobile operating system space
• Sector RoadMap: Social customer service in 2013
• A look back at mobile in the third quarter

I immediately think of Microsoft’s Surface products when seeing the Asus VivoTab, of course. There are some hardware differences but the similarities outweigh those. Asus is using an Intel Atom Z2760 to power the VivoTab, which is 9.7 millimeters thick and weighs 580 grams. The 1366 x 768 touchscreen supports up to 5 touch points simultaneously. And the battery is expected to last 9.5 hours on a single charge.

That may be a key difference between the VivoTab and $899 Surface Pro. Microsoft expects the Surface Pro to run for about half as long as its $499 Surface RT slate; the latter is powered by an energy-efficient smartphone chip and lasts around 10 hours on a charge. Asus is using an low-energy Intel chip for possibly better performance — and definitely for better app compatibility — than the Surface RT but should get similar battery life.

Asus hasn’t shared details on pricing or availability yet. If the VivoTab is priced right, say around $500, it would give consumers more of a Surface Pro experience at a lower-costing Surface RT price.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Where new opportunity lies in the mobile operating system space
• Sector RoadMap: Social customer service in 2013
• A look back at mobile in the third quarter

This is why the traditional computer makers, and Microsoft now that it sells its own Surface slate, should focus more efforts on tablet design and optimization. The desktop PC market hasn’t gone away, but the growth in it has. IDC’s forecast suggests that the same will happen in the laptop market, which will be usurped by tablets. Many PC makers were either late to the mobile device game, or not part of it at all, and have watched sales dollars filter to those making smartphones at first, and now tablets.

Of course, the unit revenue for mobile devices may be less than that of a desktop or laptop. IDC says the entire industry will see average sales price of devices “drop from $534 in 2011 to $378 in 2016.” That means computer makers will have to make up the difference in volume and the best chance to do that is by seizing momentum early, much as Apple did with its iPad.

Although it’s difficult to look forward several years in the device market, I believe that IDC’s general prediction is correct. In my opinion, it may be too conservative. Yes, desktops and laptops are still heavily in use, but that’s mainly because they support a legacy model of computing and will need to do so for some time to come. That model is changing.

Additionally, tablet hardware is improving quickly, and perhaps more importantly, so are the applications that run on tablets. Activities that once sounded absurd on a tablet just two or three years ago are now possible on an iPad, Android slate or Windows RT device. Instead of looking back at “old-school computing,” laptop makers should be looking ahead at potential software and cloud services that tablets will benefit from.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Analyzing the wearable computing market
• CES 2012: a recap and analysis
• 12 tech leaders’ resolutions for 2012

Consumers have become accustomed to tablets that offer more battery life than traditional computers, making for an interesting sales showdown for the Surface Pro, which starts at $899. The run-time information was tweeted by  the official Microsoft Surface Twitter account when asked how long the new Surface with Windows 8 Pro would run on a single charge:

@shahroom Hey Shahroom, #Surface pro will have approximately half the batter life of Surface RT.—
Surface (@surface) November 29, 2012

That works out to roughly 4.5 hours based on my own usage of a Surface RT device, which generally sees 9 hours of usage on a single charge. And this is on a tablet that’s lighter and about half the price. Surface RT has a 31.5 WHr battery while the new Surface Pro bumps the battery capacity to 42 WHr.

What’s the difference then? It’s all in the chip when you look at the detailed specifications (PDF). Surface RT runs on the ARM-based Nvidia Tegra 3 while the full-featured Surface Pro uses an Intel Core i5 Processor with Intel HD Graphics 4000. So even though the Pro battery has nearly 30 percent more battery capacity, it runs for 50 percent as long. You can put a fresh coat of paint on it, but this is essentially the same old WinTel problem that has nagged mobile devices for years.

Then again is the Surface Pro a mobile device? For most it will be mobile at least part of the time. If not, then why buy it over a standard laptop or desktop? For those planning to be mobile mavens with a full-blown instance of Windows 8 Pro on a Surface tablet, however, you’d better plan to be near an outlet at some point during your day.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• CES 2012: a recap and analysis
• Takeaways from connected consumer’s second quarter
• The big theme of MWC: How to live in a connected world

I’m certainly not trying to defend Nielsen’s study, nor the experiences of the dozen participants. In fact, I’ve struggled with the new operating system on a Surface RT review unit and I have 15 years of hands-on I.T. experience in Fortune 100 companies that relied heavily on Windows. Plus I have some previous with experience Windows Phone, which has used a similar interface to that of Windows 8 since 2010. But Windows 8 is more than tiles and touch targets.

There’s a learning curve

I couldn’t figure out how to share a web page, for example, but the function is there; thanks to my podcast co-host, Matthew Miller, I learned that the Charms section has a context-aware Share feature. Closing applications on Surface RT stumped me as well, but then I found out how to do it: While in an application, swipe down from the top of the screen to the bottom and the app will close. Well, it’s supposed to, anyway. Russell Holly at Geek.com notes that some apps are still running in the Task Manager even after closing them in this fashion.

So part of the issues then, could be due to a learning curve; not from poor design. That’s certainly a problem, but one that can be corrected through education on Microsoft’s part.

Microsoft’s multiple personality disorder

Nielsen is spot on when it comes to the touch-friendly tile user interface and the old desktop mode, however:

Unfortunately, having two environments on a single device is a prescription for usability problems for several reasons:

• Users have to learn and remember where to go for which features.
• When running web browsers in both device areas, users will only see (and be reminded of) a subset of their open web pages at any given time.
• Switching between environments increases the interaction cost of using multiple features.
• The two environments work differently, making for an inconsistent user experience.

While Windows 8 is probably the biggest break from Microsoft’s past operating systems, it’s not a complete break. Support for a desktop mode is a by-product of legacy design and, to me, represents the largest missed opportunity for Windows 8 tablets. The old Desktop mode is really there for one reason only: Microsoft Office. Instead of creating a Desktop mode for the productivity suite, Microsoft should have created a productivity suite for the touch-friendly environment. It’s as if it was easier for Microsoft to simply cram Office on tablets in a special mode rather than redesign it for effective use on mobile devices. And we know the latter can be done: Look at QuickOffice, iWorks or any number of productivity apps that work well on touch devices.

The world isn’t flat, but icons can be

I don’t quite agree with Nielsen when it comes to his criticism of the flat icons in Windows 8. I find that these fit in well with the tile interface and reduce the amount of flashiness found in icons on other systems. Utilitarian? Perhaps, but isn’t that what a section of choices for device settings is? Here’s a look at what Nielsen is complaining about, in particular.

He notes that few users actually tapped the “Change PC settings” link when tasked to change the background wallpaper in Windows 8; they thought those words were a label. Given that they were using a Surface RT tablet, perhaps the link should be “Change device settings” but this is easily fixable in a software update. The fact is — and it bears repeating — this is a new platform and there’s a learning curve involved, just as there has been for iOS and Android devices.

Scaling mobile up or bringing desktop down?

Getting back to the core issue is the approach that Microsoft has taken: One that keeps its legacy alive with a desktop version of Office. Here, I agree with Nielsen when he says:

The underlying problem is the idea of recycling a single software UI for two very different classes of hardware devices. It would have been much better to have two different designs: one for mobile and tablets, and one for the PC. I understand why Microsoft likes the marketing message of “One Windows, Everywhere.” But this strategy is wrong for users.

Looking to Apple, I see a different, so far, more successful, approach when it comes to mobile devices such as smartphones and tablets. Much of the core of iOS and OS X is shared, but the interfaces are different: The former is designed solely for touch while the latter is solely for mouse and keyboard. While some apps are similar — think iPhone, iMovie and the iWorks suite — they’re designed to work effectively on their respective form factors. In some sense, Apple is scaling up from mobile as it brings more mobile user interface tweaks and services to the desktop.

Microsoft on the other hand, is still doing what it has done for a dozen years with its Tablet PC platform: Scaling the desktop down. Granted, it’s doing far less of that than ever before as Windows 8 is the best version for touch devices yet. But that doggone Desktop is still there and once you get there, touch becomes an exercise in frustration and you revert to the keyboard and touchpad on a Surface.

I like Nielsen’s idea of one platform dedicated solely to phones and tablets. Essentially because of the design choice Microsoft made by lumping the OS for tablets and PCs together, I find that the Surface RT device competes more against other Windows laptops than Apple’s iPad or Android tablets. In my mind, that’s the biggest issue here; not how flat the icons are or the learning curve for Microsoft’s new platform.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Where new opportunity lies in the mobile operating system space
• Sector RoadMap: Social customer service in 2013
• 12 tech leaders’ resolutions for 2012

So is this essentially a cut-rate Chromebook? Not really, as you can see in my video overview.

Although I’ve only used the new C7 for part of a day, it can certainly fit in my daily workflow: I’ve been using a $449 Samsung Series 5 550 Chromebook full-time since I bought it in June. But you have to like glossy displays and be able to live with a 3.5 hour battery life on the C7. I’m not sure I could do that, but that’s a personal preference. Surprisingly, there are some things I like better on this $199 Chromebook: It has an HD front camera and a better keyboard layout that includes a Caps Lock key. And with the 1.1 GHz Intel Celeron 847 chip, performance is nearly that of my current device and faster than the $249 ARM-based Series 3 Chromebook.

I’ll have more thoughts as I spend more time with the C7, so stay tuned!

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• CES 2012: a recap and analysis
• What the Google-Motorola deal means for Android, Microsoft and the mobile industry
• The State of the Smartbook