No doubt about it, the surface should be compared with the iPad, but that's not what i'm complaining about. The reviewer states:
"The iPad may not allow you to do everything, but Apple has made sure that it’s great at what it can do. The Surface, by contrast, will let you do everything you want. The problem is that you’ll have no fun doing it."
My problem, is that the reviewer (at least in the article) seemed to make no attempt to go outside of the limits of the iPad with the Surface.
> My problem, is that the reviewer (at least in the article) seemed to make no attempt to go outside of the limits of the iPad with the Surface.
Maybe that's the point of the author then - that there is nothing that Surface can do (for him) that an iPad can't. The only example I can think of is Office, and it doesn't sound like the author needs it:
>> After using them a few times, the Office apps came to seem like a marketing gimmick—a way to insist that the Surface is different, even if the difference isn’t actually useful.
"The iPad may not allow you to do everything, but Apple has made sure that it’s great at what it can do. The Surface, by contrast, will let you do everything you want. The problem is that you’ll have no fun doing it."
My problem, is that the reviewer (at least in the article) seemed to make no attempt to go outside of the limits of the iPad with the Surface.