Why do I still read TechCrunch?

Matt Burns on Microsoft's Surface announcement (selected excerpts):

Compared to the iPad, it’s a bit utilitarian with hard lines, full size I/O ports, and heat vents. But it also seems like a serious tablet rather than a plaything.

This is the kind of thing that drives me up the wall. Since iPad is being used in businesses, schools, and by individuals for audio, video, graphic design, and general productivity I don't fully understand how the iPad is a 'plaything'. That kind of statement can't simply be thrown around and be true simply because you wrote it, Matt. Please qualify your statements.

The hardware doesn’t matter, though. Remember? The spec is dead. Microsoft wisely talked up the Surface’s capabilities and design today more than listing the computing specs.

Like battery life, which is basically irrelevant for a tablet (or any other mobile device).

I’ve yet to touch the Surface myself

Noted for future reference.

There are still a lot of unknowns at this point. Never mind the Surface’s price:

Because it's largely irrelevant.

How is the keyboard during extended sessions?

Or during any sessions. No one outside Microsoft has had opportunity to use it yet.

How hot does it get after 5 hours?

Does it even last 5 hours?

With that, how long does the battery last?

With modern Intel Core i5 processor in a 9.3mm enclosure that requires fans for cooling.

The iPad’s strength comes from the sheer number of 3rd party apps available through the App Store.

Just like the original iPhone.

Apple lured a crazy number of developers to its platform through the promise of profit-sharing and a fair distribution environment.

A dastardly tactic if ever I heard one.

Microsoft isn’t reinventing app development with the Surface. The tablet runs Windows after all. It is the most dominant computing platform on Earth. At this early stage it seems like a smart move for a developer to jump on the Metro bandwagon. Even if the Surface crashes and burns, there will be dozens of other Windows 8 tablets from the normal players.

Why would developers bother with Metro if they don't have to? I suspect most of them will just continue to develop for Windows like they always have because their product will have a greater reach. Very few devices will be Metro-only and without that push what is the motivation to add yet another platform?

To me the Surface doesn’t seem like a serious iPad contender but rather a reference design or even a halo device. When released later this year ARM models will likely start around $400-$600 and x86 models will hit closer to $1,000. Even though it will likely never outsell the iPad, the Surface sets a clear standard for HP, Dell, Lenovo, Acer, and Asus. It shows the rest of the industry the proper way to make a Windows 8 tablet. As a halo device, it’s essentially designed to draw attention to Microsoft and Windows 8 like the Corvette does for Chevy.

What? Ignoring the fact that wanting a Corvette has never lead me to to buy a Cavalier, how is a tablet priced like an "ultrabook" (read: MacBook Air clone) supposed to set the standard? If you need a proper keyboard and pointing device to use REAL Windows 8 then why not just buy an actual "ultrabook"? The way I use my iPad and my MacBook are very different. And that's why I like having two separate devices. Microsoft's whole "no compromises" mantra for Windows 8 seems kind of suspect to me. I'm very interested to see how this all shakes down when this ships, but trying to be master of both will, I suspect, lead to actually having the downside of both and the upsides of neither.

Microsoft hasn’t been hip since Windows XP.

Windows XP was hip?

Windows 7 barely makes up for Windows Vista.

That not really fair. Unless you bought Vista... then had to buy Windows 7. I actually think Windows 7 is the best OS Microsoft has ever released. Not as good as OS X Panther. But great for Microsoft.

The fate of Windows Mobile rests on a struggling Finnish company. The Zune was never loved. Bing is a clone. No one uses Hotmail. I still don’t exactly know the benefit of Windows Live. The company’s lone shinning star is a 7-year old game system. Microsoft has been just surviving over the last decade. As much as Windows itself needs a killer device like the Surface, Microsoft the company needs a desperate shot of credibility.

I enjoyed the long list of MS failures (basically anything not Windows, Office, or Xbox) then the factual declaration of Surface as a Killer device. Maybe it will be a 'killer device' but it's a little too premature to be deciding that isn't it, Matt?

Like most people, I do not have a dog in this fight. I’m not an ignorant fanboy, blindly cheering on a random company. I don’t care what company wins the mobile or desktop wars as long as the consumer ultimately wins. The last few years Apple has produced the industry leading devices. And now, once again with the Surface, Microsoft has a champion worthy of praise.

Champion? That implies victory... the would-be contender hasn't even decided when he'll fight yet. But, at least you didn't spell 'fanboy' with an 'i'.