General

@tips1660: The RT Surface has a 1366x768 resolution while the ipad 3 has a 2048x1536 resolution (which is also a 4:3 display which is better for computers)
The ipad 3 has over 2 million more pixels than the surface which is bad enough, but the surface has lower [b]P[/b]ixels [b]P[/b]er [b]I[/b]nch which is something tablets pride themselves on. It as become the status quo for a laptop to have a significantly higher PPI than a traditional display because of the way they are handled at close ranges. While the ipad 3 has an excellent PPI of 264 the Surface has a dismal PPI of 148. Both the resolution and the PPI are much lower than the average mobile device, and Microsoft attempted to drown out the criticism by having a larger screen than other tablets (which incidentally only makes the PPI issue worse).

So no, the RT does not have a good resolution; it has a horrible resolution by today's standards. The hardware is OK at best on the RT tablet. There is nothing outstanding about it. It is on par or slightly greater than other mobile devices on average. The slightly greater aspects do not justify it as having "superior hardware" because decent tablets very rarely exhibit noticeable change from minor hardware upgrades (i.e. an application that reaches its peak at 100mb RAM will not benefit much from increasing the memory by 1GB of RAM on a tablet)

Despite all the shortcomings that could be ignored if one really wishes to be a fanatic or attempt to justify their purchase, one key detail makes the RT tablet a piece of garbage: RT. Windows RT makes the RT tablet unbuyable by anyone who knows what they are doing. Microsoft worked harder to create an extra version of Windows 8 just so that tablet users could [b]literally[/b] not use a single piece of software that has ever existed for windows prior to Windows RT. This way all programs must have an RT-specific version (like the MS Office that comes with it is RT specific. Your own MS OFFICE you already own would not work on it) so every developer has to go through microsoft and sell through their app store, making Microsoft absolute maximum profits and further infringe on the consumer's rights to free non-proprietary software. Windows RT is the worst example of a closed system ever made. It dwarfs OS X in that aspect. If it was not for RT the surface might be a viable tablet, but it is not. At $800 just to not be severely limited by your own operating system, purchasing a pro tablet is not a good choice for most. The surface pro does have superior hardware in almost every aspect to other tablets, but it is also much more expensive and at that size one could simply purchase an equal or better laptop of similar size. One has literally been reduced to choosing between a dysfunctional operating system or a very high price tag with better competition.

@osiel66: Most of my results aren't based off the pro tablet. The current reviews are based on the RT tablet and the reviewers for the RT TABLET have stated that it has good resolution, hardware (I honestly don't know what PPI is, if you could elaborate).

@tips1660: You are basing your results off the Windows 8 (pro) tablet. The RT tablet has bad hardware. The resolution is very low and the PPI lower. Ultimately the RT is nearly unusable to begin with because it uses Windows RT. Only the pro tablet is usable by anyone who actually wants to get anything done except it costs upwards from $800 in which, like I said, one can just get a better device. A better device also has the great advantage of not having to use Windows or OS X.

@osiel66: my point about advertising was, if a product has a really good and enticing advertising campaign, more often than not it will get purchased. That's where microsofts been really lacking in the past.

"As for games no real games exist for RT yet. "
I believe i conceded this already

"Windows 8 surfaces are going to be alot more expensive than RT ones"
-You're paying for *eventually* a tablet that is a hybrid between a tablet/laptop with full laptop functionality, i5 processor and the ability to play games. I think its more then worth it.

"Do you not know how RT works? hardware-wise the ipad 3 has a superior processor despite it being dual core, and a far superior screen resolution which more than makes up for the smaller physical screen. "

I don't know about you, but many comparisons taken between the ipad3 and Surface have yielded that the surface does have equal video resolution if not better (see wired I think) and better brightness.

Edit: i'll look into the new lenovo thinkpad

@tips1660: Advertising doesn't matter. It doesn't make a product better. That's a foolish excuse to praise a product. Windows ME could have been given hundreds of millions of dollars in funding for pure advertising. It would still be a terrible operating system.

Windows 8 surfaces are going to be alot more expensive than RT ones. They are predicted to cost around $800. At that price it would probably be wiser to invest a bit more and purchase a tablet+laptop such as the new Lenovo X series unless one really wants a surface. As for games no real games exist for RT yet. It can't run any games or programs that currently exist for any other version of Windows that do not have a specific RT version ready to go on launch. Do you not know how RT works? hardware-wise the ipad 3 has a superior processor despite it being dual core, and a far superior screen resolution which more than makes up for the smaller physical screen. One cannot compare this with the Windows 8 version of the Surface because it is far more expensive so naturally it is better.

I highly dislike Apple and most things about them and their products but I cannot deny that the Microsoft Surface is not good. Not at all.

EDIT: Also if one is willing to put forth a bit more money for a new x series lenovo thinkpad (or less money even for an earlier generation) one could install an actual good operating system on it instead of Windows or any derivative of Macintosh.

@osiel66: windows 8 not RT is what i want. + In regards to your gaming point, the market really hasn't been tested and tried yet, it can probably run it, also hardware wise it is almost 100% superior to the IPAD (with the exception of text according to most reviewers so far), and it is compatible. Where are you getting your facts from? Also, do you understand what the purpose of advertising is? I'm kinda tired of people trying to look 'smart' by dumping on things like polls/advertising because they're for 'the common folk". Sorry to burst your bubble,but you ain't no Bill Gates.

@tips1660: You think that purchasing a tablet with Windows [b]RT[/b] which does not have all the same functions as a computer, does not play nearly any games at all, is worse in nearly all aspects to an ipad besides a few pieces of hardware and last but not least is incompatible with just about every piece of software in existence deserves to have a lot of purchases? (and advertising should play no part in an item's value. If you are influenced by this then you should be ashamed)

@osiel66 so your saying that purchasing a tablet that can do the same functions as a computer, easily portable, handles games well, and better in almost every way in comparison to the iPad w/ a decent advertising campaign doesn't deserve to have a lot of purchases?

No. It's a big no.

Still every other idiot is going to buy it because of good marketing just like with apple.

Considering that Microsoft had the first tablet technically, I'd like to see them try.