Dead on. The surface is selling a new form factor. The inclusion of Office makes it something I might consider, but only if I can get a feel for the form factor before I buy. So when Microsoft does not convince Best Buy et al to put it on shelves I can either conclude that Microsoft does not know how to market things, or that they know that my getting my hands on it at a retail outlet is not going to increase sales.

Restricting the streaming to Apple devices is just smart marketing.
Why waste money trying to sell this product to somebody who isn't already addicted?
Seriously, there are far better models for less money in both the WIFI-only and Cellular varieties.

So you're saying that Chrome can do almost 40% of what Android can do.

This hardware at this price running Linux, Android, Windows RT or even iOS would be a great bargain. What I have not yet seen in any promotion of a Chromebook is how well it works as a basic document editor when I'm *not* connected to the Cloud. If I need a lightweight mobile editing device with a permanently attached keyboard (which I cannot accidentally leave behind) then I need that portable document editor to be able to work even if the WiFI at the conference I am attending isn't working yet or is just plain overloaded. Adding a carrying case with a bluetooth keyboard, and software, to my Nexus 7 comes out way ahead Microsoft Surface. If this Chromebook ran Android, it would come out ahead. But have they really enabled Chromebooks to work effectively when detached from the network yet?

Android built iphones?

Actually I think they reinvented the flat file.

I have some vague recollection of it being a 20th century device that was a limited purpose monitor. I'm not sure I have space on my desk for a display device that can only be used with one source. It strikes me that running a separate display device just for this "television" service is inherently somewhat energy and resource wasteful. A truly energy efficient "TV" is a monitor that is also used for non-TV purposes.