"We also heard that unexpected reboots are disruptive if they happen at the wrong time." These guys really know their stuff.

I remember seeing Windows 3.0 on a 286 (16MHz with 1M RAM IIRC) and thinking it was a beautiful thing with it's shiny bevelled-looking edges on the buttons. If only I knew then and there that the significant speed hit (compared to DOS) and not-quite bug-free feel was destined to be just as much a long term feature as was the visual appearance...

Microsoft logo'd fridges with start screens on the outside.
A fridge that automatically orders too much food then crashes and spoils all the food.
A new breed of cyber criminal that holds your pantry contents to ransom with malware.
Where do I sign up?

Dude, you sound like me! Don't worry, you aren't the only one to think this way, there are at least two of us.

Windows isn't designed to work on different hardware without a reinstall, that's not anecdotal.

I have done many, many PC motherboard replacements over the years using both Windows and Linux based machines and the circumstances where Windows DOESN'T need a reinstall of the OS and drivers plus all updates and service packs (and sometimes applications) are rare. On the other hand linux in general (though not always) doesn't require any reinstallation or reconfiguration when switching main boards. The Windows reinstall process usually takes many hours.

I love the bit that says:

"In previous versions of Windows, you could get to this screen by pressing F8 before Windows started up. Windows 8 PCs start up quickly so there's not enough time to press F8."

Yeah right... Win 8 is just so fast it can't read a keypress at startup any more. Sounds like they get their marketing people to write the troubleshooting documentation.

My guess is that they officially abandoned the F8 startup key concept (even though they didn't) at the same time as they decided none of us need a real keyboard or mouse any more. This may also account for the mouse issues with the 8.1 update. Apparently everyone should be using a tablet by now so keyboard and mouse QA takes a back seat.

Seriously though, how do they manage to break something as basic as mouse operation?

Except that (in my opinion) OS X is a pleasure to use but using Windows 8 on a desktop is best described as "not that bad once you get used to it".

Before you pointed them out I had not consciously recognised the similarities between the Dock/Taskbar and Launchpad/Start screen, possibly because (in the case of the Dock anyway) the Microsoft offerings are pale imitations. I don't use noob-oriented Launchpad on OS X and don't know anyone who does because there is no reason to do so. I'm glad OS X does not force me to use lauchpad the way Win8 does with it's Start screen.

Why would you want to punish them like that? Serious question. If the product is not good enough for your own country why inflict it onto a third world country who could make even less use of it than you can? Shipping off old or otherwise useless tech to third world countries is just a sly way to get around the e-waste disposal problem.

I wish Balmer was the Kin of CEOs then he'd be gone in a couple of months and completely forgotten about by next year. Alas he is more like clippy.

Pardon my ignorance but what significance is there in being the first company to create such 'a long list of products and services'? Being first to market does not ensure commercial success, nor does it indicate the product is any good, desirable or capable of capturing market share. I'm genuinely interested to see this 'long list' or yours because the only product Microsoft have ever made that I genuinely liked (and didn't later hate for one reason or another) is the original style Microsoft Mouse (the curvy type when there was only one model available).

I think I used to work one of those.

The benefit of computers in education is completely dependent on the use of appropriate software and/or teachers having some sort of clue about how to use them. Unfortunately most schools fall short on both counts. I have worked in IT support for several schools for several years and can testify that they are mostly used to run a web browser, and play games, and in this context the overheads required to keep Windows-based computer labs working exceed the benefit when a simpler locked down device could be used instead. Maintaining Windows on laptops that kids take home is a nightmare. Having said that I would not propose any sort of tablet is a good replacement for 'real' computing tasks like programming or photo/video editing if such things are taught in the school. Also if I was buying iPads for a school I'd be bolting them to the desks because I can't see one lasting more than a day without being dropped or stolen.

I suggest that if what you say about the iPad to Surface RT switchers is true then their experiences are not indicative of those enjoyed by typical iPad buyers. You say they made their iPad purchases because they 'didn't know any better' so the logical conclusion from that statement is that they switched only after you educated them to the superiority of the Surface RT. There doesn't seem to be anyone other than yourself who thinks Surface RT is a better than iPad for those who want the iPad type of experience (which I assume means more tablet oriented than laptop oriented) as per one of your previous posts, so the scenario you describe is unlikely to occur very often. I don't know of anyone who has purchased Surface RT so even if it was a superior product there's nobody around here to 'educate' those poor fools who buy iPads. The local retailers certainly don't know how to sell them other than to 'slash' the price. Harvey Norman (Australian retailer) is currently advertising $100 off Surface RT and it looks like a permanent price drop rather than a time limited special price. Maybe they are selling so well the retailers have dropped the price as some form of community service?

Nice list, and if all those things are important to you on a tablet then I'm sure you will continue to enjoy your Surface RT.

I'm not interested in squabbling over which products are better for what reason but I would suggest that most of those things you've listed are not important to most tablet users, particularly non-computer enthusiasts. Over time we will see which products are most successful.

For anyone interested in why I personally do not rate any of the above reasons to buy Surface RT over Apple iPad as particularly significant, read on.

Ability to simultaneously display more than one app: Windows 8 is not exactly the poster boy for multiple app windows since the whole split screen thing is pretty gumby and it is one of the things I hate most about Metro, but that's just me, and I digress. I have never felt the need to display two iPad apps on screen simultaneously. I have worked in IT for many years and note that a large proportion of the average user population do not 'get' the concept of opening multiple programs simultaneously even when running the Windows Operating system. If you truly have switched four iPad owners over to Surface for this feature alone then I suggest they are not typical users. I know lots of people with iPads and I've literally never heard anyone say they want the ability to display more than one app at a time. I'm not saying it's a useless feature but I don't see it as significant to most users.

Multiple user accounts: Actually it would be nice to see multiple user accounts on the iPad so a single device could be shared with a number of users while keeping their data private. This would be extremely handy in a family environment for example. I'll give you that one but this feature alone would not be sufficient for me to want to switch to Surface though.

Flash support: Lack of flash has not really impacted me as I rarely rely on flash-only sites (we do not have Hulu here) and I can access sites that require flash on my laptop if necessary. If you feel this is a cop-out then I'll give you credit for that point as well, but lack of flash is a non-issue as far as I'm concerned.

Built in ports: I thought I might miss lack of USB for data transfer reasons but I haven't (admittedly mainly due to dropbox). Video out is available by plugin dongle but I prefer to use airplay instead as it works very well without relying on plugging in anything. You do need an Apple TV for airplay though.

An actual file manager, task manager and multitasking: honestly I am not impacted by these at all. The scenario you describe is all well and good but I have never desired to that on the iPad.

Mouse & external display support : I have no desire to try to turn my iPad into a laptop substitute. I have a laptop for that. External display support for giving presentations from iPad works fine. I hooked up a bluetooth keyboard to the iPad just to try it out and it worked great but I disconnected it after a few minutes simply because I don'y do any keyboard intensive work on the iPad.

Peripheral support: apart from occasionally wanting to print I have no need to access the peripherals you list from the iPad. You can airprint directly to many modern printers or do what I do and airprint to a printer shared by another computer.

Price: Apple commands a premium for quality and ease of use and this does not suit everyone. However in my experience a significant amount of people who are initially drawn to particular products based on cheap prices later regret buying cheap when the device doesn't live up to their expectations. The value for money equation is more significant than absolute price, but 'value' is subjective to personal taste and expectations. I personally would not buy Surface RT at any price because I don't see it's intrinsic value, let alone it's value at a particular price.

Live tiles and customisation: personally I rate the ability to pretty up your display with photos and animation at approximately negative infinity if there is such a thing. I much prefer to burn CPU cycles on productive tasks rather than on visual frills that serve no practical purpose, so even if iPad had similar visual ability I would not use it unless I knew for sure it 100% would not impact performance, and I would use the features sparingly simply because I hate clutter. The live tile concept may sound good on paper but in practice I relate to the 'less is more' concept more than the 'cram as much data into a single screen as possible' idea. That and I really don't want my photos and private correspondance dynamically displayed on screen for all to see while I'm not at my computer, and when I am at my computer I don't sit there looking at the Start screen. OK I admit I am a Mac user so I don't have a Start screen but I did use Windows 8 for several months at work and I'm not just making this up.

In conclusion:

It's clear to me that Surface RT tries to be both a general purpose laptop and a tablet simultaneously, whereas iPad is a tablet that does not attempt to be a laptop. Therefore any direct comparison is hampered by conflicting design goals and user expectations. You can argue that there is space in the market for both approaches (which is true) but I counter that argument with the opinion that the market segment where iPad has enjoyed greatest success is dominated by people who would not be drawn to buy Surface/RT in place of iPad. So with that said I do not believe Surface RT will take away any significant proportion of the iPad market. If it is any good at all it will eat into the low end laptop market, however given the much discussed x86 app incompatibility issue I can't really see this happening either. Hence I do not see the intrinsic value of Surface RT.

SHOW ME THE MONEY!!!

And remember we are discussing Surface RT here not Pro.