The Microsoft Surface Pro 5 succession: Selections, motivations, and initial impressions
As I’ve already alluded to both in recent coverage of Microsoft’s late-September product launch event, of power-vs-energy exemplified by SSDs and of hardware obsolescence forced by software-based usage lock-outs, the Microsoft Surface Pro 5 (SP5, for short, and also referred to as the Surface Pro 2017) system I’ve been using since early 2020 is in the process of being superseded:
In part, I’m being (overly, admittedly) proactive (in contrast, apparently, to plenty of others). The Windows 10 O/S is scheduled to “sunset” in two years (as I write these words in early October) and the SP5 isn’t supported by the Windows 11 successor. As I’ve mentioned before, I regularly donate my prior-generation tech hardware to local charities for others’ reuse, and I prefer to do so while the gear’s still of meaningful (specifically, security-safe) use by its recipients, i.e., while it’s still actively being supported with BIOS, driver, O/S and other software updates. Both of my SP5s (I’ve got a spare sitting on the shelf in case the primary breaks down, since I use the SP5 for work) still qualify under that criterion.
That said, as I mentioned last month:
The SP5 is getting a bit “long in the tooth” at this point, anyway; more frequently than I’d prefer, for example, it overheats and automatically downclocks to unusable-performance levels until it cools back down. And its limited system memory (8 GBytes) and storage (256 GBytes), both non-user-upgradeable, are increasingly constraining (although everything’s relative).
Also introduced last month (with further elaboration promised, specifically in this post) was the fact that I’ve decided on a two-pronged update path (once again, in both cases, comprising both a primary and spare system). To wit, I picked up both a pair of Surface Pro 7+ (SP7+) computers:
and two Surface Pro 8s (SP8s):
Why on earth did I make these seeming redundant purchases? The short candid answer is that:
I couldn’t definitively decide on one or the other, and
I’m sufficiently fiscal resource-blessed that I don’t have to “settle” for one or the other.
Why I couldn’t choose between them, along with what I didn’t choose instead, is what I hope to explain in the remainder of this writeup. First off, I wanted my successor system(s) to include built-in cellular data connectivity, like that in my SP5. I don’t leverage cellular service much, in part because the SP5 isn’t my primary on-the-go laptop; I’m mostly an Apple guy. But when Wi-Fi is unavailable (or has sketchy security) but I still need to jump on the Internet, cellular sure is convenient. This requirement meant that standard Surface Pro 7x and 8 versions weren’t options; I had to go with LTE-inclusive “For Business” variants (as well as, more generally, with the SP7+ vs the SP7, since the latter doesn’t come in an integrated-cellular option).
This LTE-inclusive qualifier also meant, for example, that the highest-end SP7+ based on Intel’s Core i7 CPU wasn’t an available option to me, since that particular CPU is only offered with Wi-Fi-only systems. Similarly, I couldn’t select a version of either the “For Business” SP7+ or SP8 with 32 GBytes of system memory; again, for unknown reasons, that feature set option is also only available for Wi-Fi-only systems. And it also excluded any x86 CPU-based models of the even newer Surface Pro 9, since integrated cellular (5G in this case) is included only with Arm CPU-based system “flavors” (which are largely redundant with my existing Surface Pro X).
Here’s what I ended up with (all sourced from eBay merchants, and all with 16 GBytes of RAM and 256 GByte SSDs):
SP7+ (both primary and backup, $545 used each, including Type Cover keyboards):
SP8 (primary, $949 open-box with factory warranty until July 2024):
SP8 (backup, $849 used with 1-year Allstate warranty):
Note that the SP7+ and SP8 systems are all based on 11th-generation Intel mobile CPUs. This is one key difference (of several) between the SP7+ and precursor SP7 systems, which are based on 10th-generation Intel processors. Both the SP7+s and SP8s came standard with the “Pro” version of Windows 11, befitting their “For Business” status.
A key difference between the SP7+ (along with the SP8) and both the SP7 and prior-generation Surface Pros, including my SP5, is that the newer systems support user-replaceable and capacity-upgradeable SSDs, as those of you who read last month’s piece already know. Although the lack of user-upgradeable memory—not to mention of a 32 GByte option—in both system generations I bought is unfortunate, it’s tempered by the fact that they both include twice the DRAM of my SP5. The 256 GByte SSDs that came with all four systems are even less of a concern, due to their user accessibility, which has already enabled me update both generations’ primary systems to 1 TByte storage capacities.
Speaking of memory and storage, by the way, some of you who’ve also been shopping for Surface Pros might be wondering why I seemingly spent so much on mine. The answer to your question lies in the fine print; make sure you’re comparing apples to apples (and speaking of which, what I’m about to say also applies to Apples). Entry-level Core i3 configurations are less expensive, even brand new, sometimes even including Type Cover keyboard accessories, as are those with only 8 GBytes of RAM and/or 128 GByte SSDs (not to mention Wi-Fi-only models). But for already-explained reasons, those low-end variants weren’t suitable for my purposes. And anyway, it’s all relative; a still-available SP8 kitted out just like my primary system currently sells brand new for $1649.99 direct from Microsoft.
Now, what are the differences between the SP7+ and SP8, and why wasn’t I able to definitively choose a winner between them? For one thing, only the Core i7-based variants of the SP7+ come with fans to assist in thermal management; mine are fanless. Conversely, all SP8 models (including both of mine) come with fans. This differentiation is a mixed blessing, frankly; on the one hand, with the SP7+ I won’t ever need to listen to rapidly spinning motor-fed fan blades. On the other hand, as previously noted with the SP5, there’ve been plenty of times when I yearned for a fan that would keep the CPU cool enough to head off speed-killing auto-downclocking.
The broader divergence between the two alternatives involves their displays and related form factor deviances. For one thing, as I noted last month, while Microsoft had swapped out the upper right-side DisplayPort connector on the SP6 and predecessors (including my SP5) with a more function-flexible USB-C in the SP7x generations, the company went several steps further in this regard with the SP8. First off, Microsoft replaced the second (lower) right-side connector, formerly USB-A, with a second USB-C port. Both ports also now support not only USB 3.1 Gen 2 10 Mbps bandwidth but also 40 Mbps Thunderbolt 4. And, while on the subject of side-located ports and such, it also bears mentioning that with the SP8, Microsoft relocated the formerly top-side situated power switch and volume toggle assembly to the right and left sides, respectively. That said, on the SP9 both USB-C/TB4 ports move to the left side, too.
With the SP8, Microsoft also swapped out the longstanding 2736×1824 pixel 12.3” LCD for a 13” 2880×1920 pixel resolution successor, though you won’t necessarily notice the change unless you turn both computers on, when the shrunk-down bezels (leading to ~11@ greater usable display area) of the new LCD will be obvious. The SP8’s display also delivers refresh rates up to 120 Hz, and it supports the haptics-augmented second-generation Surface Slim Pen. That all said, these and other design changes compelled Microsoft to change the system physical specs:
SP7+: 11.5 x 7.9 x 0.33 inches (292 x 201 x 8.5 mm), 1.75 lb (796 g)
SP8: 11.3 x 8.2 x 0.37 inches (287 x 208 x 9.3 mm), 1.96 lb (891 g)
These seemingly miniscule variances (only 0.2 inches shorter, 0.3 inches wider and 0.04 inches thicker!) still mean that my Kensington Dock:
which deftly converts the Surface Pro into a pseudo desktop computer and worked with my SP4, works with my SP5 and will work with my SP7+ units…won’t fit the SP8.
The same form factor shifts adversely affect my existing Brydge 12.3 Pro+ keyboard, which transform everything up to and including the SP7+, but not the SP8 (for which I was compelled to purchase a successor), into a “true” laptop:
The bottom line: had I not found two like-new SP7+ systems complete with normally-$120-standalone Type Covers for a shade over $500 each, I probably would have bit the bullet and gone straight to the SP8, obsoleting my existing accessories in the process. Thankfully, I didn’t need to do that, and I’ll hopefully be able to get at least a few more years out of them via this upgrade two-step. That said, the SP7+ will eventually fall by the wayside for any number of possible reasons, and I’ll then transition to the SP8 full-time. But that said, I certainly hope that what compels the SP7+ retirement isn’t yet another round of Microsoft software-induced premature obsolescence. Quoting from Betanews’ coverage of the supposedly soon-upcoming Windows 12 (which by the way is also rumored to be subscription-based like Office 365…sigh…):
Microsoft may be saying nothing about the release of Windows 12, but that’s not stopping news slipping out about the successor to Windows 11. And thanks to information from Intel, it seems that 2024 is when we can expect to see a new Windows release.
The leak comes courtesy of David Zinsner — Chief Financial Officer at Intel — who confidently referred to “the Windows refresh” which he says is due to land next year. While his comments are not solid confirmation of the launch of Windows 12, it is a credible addition to the ever-growing pile of Windows rumors.
“We actually think 2024 is going to be a pretty good year for client, in particular because of the Windows refresh. We still think that the install base is pretty old, and does require a refresh. We think next year may be the start of that given the Windows catalyst.”
While this is a long way from being confirmation of Microsoft’s Windows 12 plans, it is very unlikely that Intel is referring to a minor update to Windows 11. The phrase “Windows refresh” is vague, but it strongly implies a major upgrade is on the way. With Intel being a significant partner for Microsoft, the company will be aware of many — if not all — of the plans for the operating system, lending validity to what’s been said.
So let me get this straight. Windows 11 was introduced in June 2021 and released to production in October of that same year…only two years ago. The Windows 10 predecessor, released to production in July 2015, is scheduled to go end-of-life two years from now, driving plenty of otherwise perfectly good hardware into extinction in the process. But Microsoft’s supposedly already planning to release Windows 11’s successor next year, leading to Windows 11’s own inevitable sooner-or-later lost-support demise, apparently one (judging from Intel’s comments) even more aggressively hardware-obsoleting than the one we’re dealing with now? Maybe it’s time for me to give Linux yet another try…
Reader thoughts are as-always welcomed in the comments!
—Brian Dipert is the Editor-in-Chief of the Edge AI and Vision Alliance, and a Senior Analyst at BDTI and Editor-in-Chief of InsideDSP, the company’s online newsletter.
Related Content
Amazon, Microsoft and Google: Services, software and system launch events for the fall (but not for the frugal)
Power vs energy: SSD and HDD case studies
Microsoft’s Surface Duo: A software evolution testimonial, but for who?
The Microsoft Surface Pro X: Windows without the x(86)
<!–
VIDEO AD
–><!–
div-gpt-ad-inread
–>
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-native’); });
–>
The post The Microsoft Surface Pro 5 succession: Selections, motivations, and initial impressions appeared first on EDN.
