I believe both companies see increased convergence for 90% of use cases down the line, and Microsoft's just making a more dramatic transition. I can see the argument that it's premature to make the big jump at this point, before there's a Metro app ecosystem or anything (and I'd be very antagonistic towards any dramatic changes to the non-Metro interface, since for the things I use my PC for, I don't want Metro), but I can also see an argument that it's better to make the painful transition early.
And I'm gradually just resigning myself to the fact that the things I want a computer for aren't the same as most people's... so whoever provides the least-painful way to still get power-user stuff done in a "Post PC" world will get my money. I'm very intrigued about running Lightroom on a Surface Pro and tossing it in my bag with my camera...
Do you want a 2 pound tablet though? That's the big problem with the Surface Pro. The original iPad at 1.5 pounds was generally considered to be too heavy by a lot of people. I can't imagine adding an additional half pound to it and being able to actually use it as a tablet anymore.
It seems like Microsofts end game is that you will have one device and the interface for interacting with that device will depend on where you are. If docked at home with external monitor, keyboard, and mouse you get more of the desktop feel. Unplug the device and take it with you and you have more of the touch based interface.
And second, probably because they didn't want to be the ones that actually push the knife deep into their decades long partner, Intel, and they wanted to drag them along in the "post-PC" era.
If this is confusing people on HN, think what it will be like for consumers since the two devices look very similar. Imagine trying to explain to someone that their laptop can't run software X that someone else's otherwise identical (or near enough) laptop can because "it has an ARM chip not an intel one".
Instead of saying " Supports Windows 8 " , non metro software will now have to say " Supports Windows8* "
I wonder how many developers will bother with metro since we already have a bewilderingly huge choices of platforms to support with our software, including "Just give up and do a web app".
Will anyone develop software? I'm sure they will for one definite reason - hope. Lots of folks in the ecosystem with skills in ms tool chain etc. who will prospectively develop stuff. But key developers will only ship stuff if the platform is successful.
Windows 8 is certainly a sign that MS is steering in the right direction. Its income base isn't disappearing immediately, so it may have the time to do its usual thing of getting it good enough in version 3. Windows 8 seems close enough that MS might even have it right by version 2.
Here is where I think Microsoft may have screwed the pooch:
* Orphaning WP7.
* Possibly orphaning/pissing off its third party partners. (When will they give up their abusive relationship?)
There are too many hardware constraints. Current ARM chips have less than 1/10 the memory bandwidth of current Intel notebook CPUs and in real-world benchmarks are MUCH slower. Ditto tablet vs notebook GPUs. At best, Microsoft is making a tablet with a keyboard, not a notebook/tablet hybrid.
I love my iPad. But Surface isn't going to save me from buying a laptop. There are lots of things that I've found that I just couldn't move over to my iPad, and none of those are going to move over to a Surface either.
So at the very, very most, Surface saves you from buying one of these:
http://www.zagg.com/accessories/logitech-ipad-2-keyboard-cas...
If you unplug your keyboard and mouse, you get a UI that is designed for touch.
Makes sense to me.
If you want an iOS clone, there's always Android. Why should Windows too play a me-too copycat and reduce choice to the user? What benefit is there to that?