Teksyndicate's review of the Surface Pro 3 (High quality review from Wendell)

[GoodBytes]

Exactly. Microsoft claims this device is the best of both worlds and can replace both a tablet and a laptop. The "nerdiest" approach means that he approaches this as a PC user who would look at this as a laptop, meaning docking and display port stuff are fair games since laptops with better GPUs that can handle 4k 60hz do exists. I think Goodbytes it's just angry that someone calls Microsoft up on their claims and points out they only kinda deliver but forgets that this is a direct product from them: Suddenly hardware choices, drivers and OS limitations are fair game and you can't just pass the buck as "Oh that's a known intel APU issue!" well no, we're not reviewing just the OS we're reviewing a finished product.

Humm no. I already do complains about the Surface Pro 3 (a bit of taste)

http://www.surfaceforums.net/forum/microsoft-surface-pro-3/9382-has-go-back-7.html#post66016

Yes, it is marketed are such indeed. But that is like saying "Well.. I can't play my games at max settings, like I can my Alienware SLI high-end GeForce GPUs".. so it CAN NOT replace a laptop". There is some common sense to apply in life.

My problem with his review, is blaming the wrong thing. He is not some person on the forum doing a review, where he or she can do mistake, and a discussion with the community can lead to better understanding and correction, or discover new issues about the device. He is doing a real review, and being seen as a legit source for reviews. Imagine if AnandTech comes out and say that Windows 7 is crap, it always crashes, it pop-up porn ads everywhere, it is slow, and comes included with spyware and viruses? Well we all know Windows 7, but imagine if that was out upon the release of Win7. I mean we know it is clearly wrong. That he installed crap on the system. But, now you have people believing this, as there is a level of trust with the reader.

As for: Microsoft picks the hardware. It YOUR DUTY to buy a system that fits your needs and know what you are getting. If you truly need 4K 60Hz, then you want to look at MINIMUM an Intel M series CPU, and even then, you maybe want to look at AMD or Nvidia GPU solution for a smooth experience, as Intel solution aren't powerful enough to handle it properly, and in the case of the U series, it is able to deliver 60Hz 4K, and the Y series, being a much slower GPU, only 2560x1600.

If you are doing a serious review, and you have people that trust you, you better do your research, use the device seriously for a while, and certainly don't came out and say how your review is the best, and how it will "nerdy" as it will have a lot details, and then provide none of that.

That is my problem with this review, and that is why I am annoyed by it.

The system could have been any other system, and I would say the same.

[ZeroBreaker]

snip

You missed the point in the review where he said it wasn't an issue that would be solved because of 4th gen haswell chip limitations?

It's a review. It has to take into account everything that the reviewer considers important points on the device. If wendell has a problem with displayport on the device, it should be told to the viewer, regardless of where the blame is. And he does point the blame in the right direction, so i don't see your issue.

You seem to have more of a problem with the fact he claims it's a nerdy review. Show this video to a non techie and see if they don't call it nerdy. There aren't many techies reviewing this product, and I can't find a comparable video review. So again, don't see where the justification is for your annoyance.

[Misanthrope]

Yes, it is marketed are such indeed. But that is like saying "Well.. I can't play my games at max settings, like I can my Alienware SLI high-end GeForce GPUs".. so it CAN NOT replace a laptop". There is some common sense to apply in life.

Bad example since that is not the expected usage of a laptop (gaming), to be fair to Microsoft they didn't say it would replace a gaming laptop. External display it's a common feature for all laptops and one that get's used quite a bit in fact.

 

My problem with his review, is blaming the wrong thing. He is not some person on the forum doing a review, where he or she can do mistake, and a discussion with the community can lead to better understanding and correction, or discover new issues about the device. He is doing a real review, and being seen as a legit source for reviews. Imagine if AnandTech comes out and say that Windows 7 is crap, it always crashes, it pop-up porn ads everywhere, it is slow, and comes included with spyware and viruses? Well we all know Windows 7, but imagine if that was out upon the release of Win7. I mean we know it is clearly wrong. That he installed crap on the system. But, now you have people believing this, as there is a level of trust with the reader.

If this was a review aimed at a Toshiba or Asus laptop/hybrid then yes, I could see how that's kind of unfair. However this is freaking Microsoft we're talking about, they literally make the fucking OS and they can't fix their limitations for their own hardware product?

You seem unable to make that distinction: This is not a "device" review this should be equal to an ipad or dvr device review since the same company is responsible for both parts of the equation: Hardware and Software. There's no divide here, there's no reason to give em a pass in known OS flaws.

 

As for: Microsoft picks the hardware. It YOUR DUTY to buy a system that fits your needs and know what you are getting.

And as my duty, I'll be damn if I don't get to hear about the limitations from a reviewer. Yes it might have been said previously, but like I said if Microsoft made it's bed with intel APU then they better fucking sleep on it now. You even agreed yourself earlier on this post on how Microsoft is indeed marketing this as good enough for both Tablet and Laptop usage, but if I expect laptop usage it is "MY DUTY" to magically know that Microsoft's claims were overly optimistic on some areas without Wendell talking about them?

Is not like he gave them a ton of shit about it he was just fair and praised the good parts equally and walks away with a fairly balanced review. To add that the fact that you bring up stupid things like the Wilson thing from home improvement makes me thing your objections are nothing more than nitpicking out of your personal bias against him.

[GoodBytes]

You missed the point in the review where he said it wasn't an issue that would be solved because of 4th gen haswell chip limitations?

It's a review. It has to take into account everything that the reviewer considers important points on the device. If wendell has a problem with displayport on the device, it should be told to the viewer, regardless of where the blame is. And he does point the blame in the right direction, so i don't see your issue.

You seem to have more of a problem with the fact he claims it's a nerdy review. Show this video to a non techie and see if they don't call it nerdy. There aren't many techies reviewing this product, and I can't find a comparable video review. So again, don't see where the justification is for your annoyance.

There is a difference between:

"Keep in mind that the system uses U series Intel integrated graphics and that it can only do 4K at 30Hz even on DisplayPort, if you plan to run a 4K display it may be something to consider."

and

"The device has this big issue, it can't do 4K 30Hz... Microsoft doesn't know what they doing, they should hire me. I know everything! They don't know shit" and blah blah blah...

[Askew]

There comes a time in any Microsoft related topic, that high winds with a chance of Misanthrope/Goodbytes showers become increasingly likely.

 

Today's forecast gentlemen, is rain.

 

[Misanthrope]

There is a difference between:

"Keep in mind that the system uses U series Intel integrated graphics and that it can only do 4K at 30Hz even on DisplayPort, if you plan to run a 4K display it may be something to consider."

and

"The device has this big issue, it can't do 4K 30Hz... Microsoft doesn't know what they doing, they should hire me. I know everything! They don't know shit" and blah blah blah...

Again you're basically saying "Let's not blame Microsoft who knowingly tried to cut corners by selecting an APU with known limitations and didn't worked with them to improve the driver at all and just left it basically as if" Some other vendors might have a difficulty getting into the OS to address this kind of issue, you know, some other vendors that don't fucking make the OS themselves.

Seriously I don't think I'll be sticking around and will have to disappoint Askew, you keep making the same points and to me this is asked and answer whenever you agree or not.

[GoodBytes]

Bad example since that is not the expected usage of a laptop (gaming), to be fair to Microsoft they didn't say it would replace a gaming laptop. External display it's a common feature for all laptops and one that get's used quite a bit in fact.

Laptop is a laptop. YOU decide to classify the laptop with sub section. And if you do, then you know that the Surface Pro line is similar as thin, lightweight and compact laptops, which the manufacture can choose in getting or not the Ultrabook® marking on it.

However this is freaking Microsoft we're talking about, they literally make the fucking OS and they can't fix their limitations for their own hardware product?

The limitation is NOT Windows. The limitation is Intel integrated graphics on the U series is not powerful enough to handle 4K 60Hz. The same way it is not powerful enough to run Crysis at max settings, native resolution.

And as my duty, I'll be damn if I don't get to hear about the limitations from a reviewer. Yes it might have been said again, but like I said if Microsoft made it's bed with intel APU then they better fucking sleep on it now. You even agreed yourself earlier on this post on how Microsoft is indeed marketing this as good enough for both Tablet and Laptop usage, but if I expect laptop usage it is "MY DUTY" to magically know that Microsoft's claims were overly optimistic on some areas without Wendell talking about them?

Wow. I am seriously disappointed in you with this comment.

Is not like he gave them a ton of shit about it he was just fair and praised the good parts equally and walks away with a fairly balanced review. To add that the fact that you bring up stupid things like the Wilson thing from home improvement makes me thing your objections are nothing more than nitpicking out of your personal bias against him.

How? Someone said it he is like trying to be batman, and I am saying, no he is not really original and this is more Wilson. It has nothing to do with the review. Hence why it was in a different post. It was a tangent discussion. How is providing information nitpicking.

[GoodBytes]

Again you're basically saying "Let's not blame Microsoft who knowingly tried to cut corners by selecting an APU with known limitations and didn't worked with them to improve the driver at all and just left it basically as if" Some other vendors might have a difficulty getting into the OS to address this kind of issue, you know, some other vendors that don't fucking make the OS themselves.

Seriously I don't think I'll be sticking around and will have to disappoint Askew, you keep making the same points and to me this is asked and answer whenever you agree or not.

Cut corners? oh I am sorry, the team behind a product is limited by physics. Cheap-ass! Horrible product! Do not buy!

All laptops should have a GeForce Titan Z in them, with a 16 core CPU and be paper thin, and have 24h minimum of battery life, all by being fanless. Else don't bother release anything. No one would care.

[Misanthrope]

Laptop is a laptop. YOU decide to classify the laptop with sub section. And if you do, then you know that the Surface Pro line is similar as thin, lightweight and compact laptops, which the manufacture can choose in getting or not the Ultrabook® marking on it.

Nitpicking and arguing semantics, I'm not addressing this I think I made my point sufficiently clear despite my language barrier limitations.

The limitation is NOT Windows. The limitation is Intel integrated graphics on the U series is not powerful enough to handle 4K 60Hz. The same way it is not powerful enough to run Crysis at max settings, native resolution.

If it's a hardware limitation, they chose the hardware. If it's an OS limitation, well they make the OS. If it's both things like I suspect (bad drivers) then who better to collaborate with intel to iron out this issues than Microsoft. I no longer thing that this concept of a single company being behind the hardware selection and the OS development escapes you but rather you willingly ignore the issue, change the subject, repeat old arguments.

[Misanthrope]

Cut corners? oh I am sorry, the team behind a product is limited by physics. Cheap-ass! Horrible product! Do not buy!

All laptops should have a GeForce Titan Z in them, with a 16 core CPU and be paper thin, and have 24h minimum of battery life, all by being fanless. Else don't bother release anything. No one would care.

Yeah, Fuck Misanthrope for....expecting Microsoft not to make ridiculous claims like "This product can replace both a tablet and a laptop".....Fuck him! Seriously I didn't set up the ridiculously high expectations for them, MS did that all by themselves. Don't worry, they can take it and you haven't even addressed the fact that this is all fixable with future updates and just want to defend your Redmond heroes beyond all rationality and smite the evil Dr. Diaper who dares to (imho accurate but still) joke about being able to replace MS engineers and developers

[ZeroBreaker]

There is a difference between:

"Keep in mind that the system uses U series Intel integrated graphics and that it can only do 4K at 30Hz even on DisplayPort, if you plan to run a 4K display it may be something to consider."

and

"The device has this big issue, it can't do 4K 30Hz... Microsoft doesn't know what they doing, they should hire me. I know everything! They don't know shit" and blah blah blah...

Your argument is getting dafter with every post. He says clearly two times in the video on two different issues 'fire the TESTING GUY and hire me' by which he means HIRE SOMEONE WHO KNOWS HOW TO TEST. SO many avoidable issues with every surface launch is his issue, and it's a justified complaint. They could have got a decent QC'er and he would have told them hang on, 4k displays don't work, and they would checked into it and made this info clear at launch but they didn't which is why we have reviews in the first place, to showcase potential limitations and issues.

You just gonna ignore the fact that he says he LIKES the device? I LIKE my surface pro? there are issues and he is pointing them out. This is what a review is. Still don't see your issue.

Grow up and get over yourself.

 

[GoodBytes]

Nitpicking and arguing semantics, I'm not addressing this I think I made my point sufficiently clear despite my language barrier limitations.

This is called common sense. Which I am disappointed in you. You are usually the one with a bit too much of it. Now you have none on this discussion, because you are trying to defend this inadequate review.

If it's a hardware limitation, they chose the hardware. If it's an OS limitation, well they make the OS. If it's both things like I suspect (bad drivers) then who better to collaborate with intel to iron out this issues than Microsoft. I no longer thing that this concept of a single company being behind the hardware selection and the OS development escapes you but rather you willingly ignore the issue, change the subject, repeat old arguments.

Well, why you don't complain about your how your current GPU can't handle 8K? It should be the manufacture of your GPU to complain to AMD or Nvidia, who needs to complain to DisplayPort group, to make it happen, else make their own system, and the GPU should handle that 8K work load. In fact, you should have Nvidia to court, for releasing the GeForce 6000 series, with "only" 256MB of memory, making inadequate for multiple window support at 2560x1600 resolution, where dragging a window isn't as fast and smooth, and that windows needs to be close. For Vista and up

See how ridiculous it sounds? Technology limitation is technology limitation. Simple as that.

If Microsoft went with AMD, then the CPU would be inadequate in performance, because AMD favors GPU power over CPU. While Intel is CPU power over GPU.

There is currently nothing that Microsoft can do to fix that. They don't have teh expertise or knowledge to send engineers at AMD to make the product themselves, plus it would make 0 business sense, and nor Intel.

[GoodBytes]

Your argument is getting dafter with every post. He says clearly two times in the video on two different issues 'fire the TESTING GUY and hire me' by which he means HIRE SOMEONE WHO KNOWS HOW TO TEST. SO many avoidable issues with every surface launch is his issue, and it's a justified complaint. They could have got a decent QC'er and he would have told them hang on, 4k displays don't work, and they would checked into it and made this info clear at launch but they didn't which is why we have reviews in the first place, to showcase potential limitations and issues.

You just gonna ignore the fact that he says he LIKES the device? I LIKE my surface pro? there are issues and he is pointing them out. This is what a review is. Still don't see your issue.

Grow up and get over yourself.

Yes, Microsoft and all companies should make a list of thing on what their product can't do.

With an important note on all their TV ads, how their product sucks.

Contact your law maker about it, to make it a law.

[ZeroBreaker]

Yes, Microsoft and all companies should make a list of thing on what their product can't do.

With an important note on all their TV ads, how their product sucks.

Contact your law maker about it, to make it a law.

The user guide, or spec sheet, or whatever should MAKE IT CLEAR that it does not support video output at a framerate that, by all rights, it should support. Instead, the user guide says this :

'Mini DisplayPort 1.2 Share what’s on your Surface Pro 3 by connecting it to an HDTV, monitor, or projector (video adapters sold separately). See Connect to a TV, monitor, or projector for more info.'

Not MiniDisplayport 1.2 at 4k 30hz, to clarify that it does not go the full 60hz as supported by the standard, but just lets the user be misguided. THAT IS A PROBLEM. If an android device said 5MP camera sensor, but could only save pictures at 3MP because of a fault in the chipset, do you think this should be mentioned or not? It supports HALF THE FRAMERATE than it should. Surely this should be made clear by microsoft? Starting to think you own a majority stake in microsoft, only logical reason you would defend them misguiding potential customers.

[GoodBytes]

The user guide, or spec sheet, or whatever should MAKE IT CLEAR that it does not support video output at a framerate that, by all rights, it should support. Instead, the user guide says this :

'Mini DisplayPort 1.2 Share what’s on your Surface Pro 3 by connecting it to an HDTV, monitor, or projector (video adapters sold separately). See Connect to a TV, monitor, or projector for more info.'

Not MiniDisplayport 1.2 at 4k 30hz, to clarify that it does not go the full 60hz as supported by the standard, but just lets the user be misguided. THAT IS A PROBLEM. If an android device said 5MP camera sensor, but could only save pictures at 3MP because of a fault in the chipset, do you think this should be mentioned or not? It supports HALF THE FRAMERATE than it should. Surely this should be made clear by microsoft? Starting to think you own a majority stake in microsoft, only logical reason you would defend them misguiding potential customers.

Ah! good point!

But for detail specs about a specific hardware ability, it is listed on the hardware manufacture (in this case Intel) website.

See if the reviewer said, blamed Intel, then I would have no problem with his review (beside the USB port count on the Surface Pro 2), and fully support his view. I also find it unacceptable that the GPU supports Display 1.2 and can't be pushed to the max. Even if it is an Atom CPU with integrated graphic solution, it should support the max resolution of the output. But blaming it on someone else, even if it was eMachine, I would have said the same thing as now.

I just hate when blame is incorrectly pointed at. And that is my big problem.

[Misanthrope]

Well, why you don't complain about your how your current GPU can't handle 8K?

I would if they advertise it or claim it on interviews:

According to a post by a member of the Surface Team during their “Ask Me Anything” question and answer session on Reddit today, the core i3, i5 and i7 models of the Surface Pro 3 can drive a single 4K display in addition to the tablet’s 2160 x 1440 pixel display.

http://www.geekwire.com/2014/microsoft-details-surface-4k-display-support-hints-thunderbolt-connection/

[Askew]

I just hate when blame is incorrectly pointed at. And that is my big problem.

 

Like I said before, I don't think he is blaming Microsoft for the limitations of the Intel hardware, but that he is calling them out for not providing clarification of those limitations, and blaming MS for the limitations of their piece of hardware as a whole.

 

They chose that CPU, and therefore knew it couldn't operate to the full DP 1.2 standard and chose not to say anything and still advertise it as compatible with the standard, I would point that out if I were reviewing the item and I wouldn't be blaming Intel for it.

[Misanthrope]

Like I said before, I don't think he is blaming Microsoft for the limitations of the Intel hardware, but that he is calling them out for not providing clarification of those limitations, and blaming MS for the limitations of their piece of hardware as a whole.

 

They chose that CPU, and therefore knew it couldn't operate to the full DP 1.2 standard and chose not to say anything and still advertise it as compatible with the standard, I would point that out if I were reviewing the item and I wouldn't be blaming Intel for it.

I bet if this was an Apple product for example others like him would change their tune and blame Apple since they clearly sell their specific hardware and OS together. Or the opposite: we praise Microsoft for going with the mighty i5 and i7 in this miracle of technology (I haven't seen anyone praising intel on managing i7 on it, only Microsoft) but if the mighty i5 is suddenly having a stroke when plugging in display port, well it's intel fault leave MS alone! Sadly we're 3 pages in and he refuses to acknowledge this very simple concept: This is Microsoft the hardware vendor, not Microsoft the OS maker.

[ZeroBreaker]

Ah! good point!

But for detail specs about a specific hardware ability, it is listed on the hardware manufacture (in this case Intel) website.

See if the reviewer said, blamed Intel, then I would have no problem with his review (beside the USB port count on the Surface Pro 2), and fully support his view. I also find it unacceptable that the GPU supports Display 1.2 and can't be pushed to the max. Even if it is an Atom CPU with integrated graphic solution, it should support the max resolution of the output. But blaming it on someone else, even if it was eMachine, I would have said the same thing as now.

I just hate when blame is incorrectly pointed at. And that is my big problem.

See, that's perfectly reasonable - of course blame should be apportioned to the correct company responsible. But he did. In the video he says the issue won't get fixed because it's a problem with the processor and not microsoft and the surface pro 2 had the same issue. His problem is microsoft was aware of this issue in the pro 2, and presumably was aware of it in the pro 3, and if not they should have been aware of the issue through testing (hence the comment on firing the testing guy and hiring him, because he found the issue straightaway both with the pro 2 and the pro 3), and yet they have not made their customers aware that the displayport has hardware limitations and does not support the full framrate 4k output it should. He had no issue with microsoft in the hardware, it was the actual letting people know and letting him know that was the issue.

[Askew]

If he was reviewing that Intel chip alone, and the manual said the iGPU can drive 4K over DP 1.2 and I later found that it couldn't fulfill the standard once I'd fitted it into the hardware I was building as I expected, THEN I would come to Intel with my complaint.

 

If I instead chose to overlook the situation and pass my finished hardware with that iGPU inside onto my customer, and continue to not mention the limitation issue, then that's on me as far as my customers are concerned.

[beebskadoo]

Yea.

However for the best info on the device: Anandtech + MobileTechReview (not out yet)

Anandtech goes in more as a power demanding user, where they push the device to the max, and see how are things. Mobile Tech Review goes from a "actually using the device in real world situation" with a focus on the pen technology for artists and note takers, something that the the great majority of reviews, ignores, when it is the prime point of getting the device, else get an ultrabook.

Lisa from mobile tech review released the review a few days ago, she did a great job too (as always)

[GoodBytes]

I bet if this was an Apple product for example others like him would change their tune and blame Apple since they clearly sell their specific hardware and OS together. Or the opposite: we praise Microsoft for going with the mighty i5 and i7 in this miracle of technology (I haven't seen anyone praising intel on managing i7 on it, only Microsoft) but if the mighty i5 is suddenly having a stroke when plugging in display port, well it's intel fault leave MS alone! Sadly we're 3 pages in and he refuses to acknowledge this very simple concept: This is Microsoft the hardware vendor, not Microsoft the OS maker.

Absolutely not. I would have done the same.

In fact, Apple MacBook Air, can't do 4K 60Hz either, as mentioned on Intel website:

https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/quick-reference-guide-to-intel-processor-graphics

(MacBook Air uses the Core i5-4260U).

Notice also, how I didn't have a problem with his other complaints on the device, because I agree.

The device has issues, and Microsoft lack of experience in making hardware is lacking. The device is not terrible, but they are issues.

[beebskadoo]

You missed the point in the review where he said it wasn't an issue that would be solved because of 4th gen haswell chip limitations?

It's a review. It has to take into account everything that the reviewer considers important points on the device. If wendell has a problem with displayport on the device, it should be told to the viewer, regardless of where the blame is. And he does point the blame in the right direction, so i don't see your issue.

You seem to have more of a problem with the fact he claims it's a nerdy review. Show this video to a non techie and see if they don't call it nerdy. There aren't many techies reviewing this product, and I can't find a comparable video review. So again, don't see where the justification is for your annoyance.

Though he did state that the 'bad' things about it should all be able to be fixed with a firmware/software update. So he unfairly pegged the haswell limitations on Microsoft even though he later stated that the issues are due to architecture limitations.

[Askew]

Absolutely not. I would have done the same.

In fact, Apple MacBook Air, can't do 4K 60Hz either, as mentioned on Intel website:

https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/quick-reference-guide-to-intel-processor-graphics

(MacBook Air uses the Core i5-4260U).

 

Yes, and that is made clear in the specifications, they clarify it as Microsoft have failed to do with the Surface 3, which is the root of this entire argument.

 

[GoodBytes]

Yes, and that is made clear in the specifications, they clarify it as Microsoft have failed to do with the Surface 3, which is the root of this entire argument.

 

It doesn't state 4K 30Hz limitation. Try again.