Close... but too many compromises
A few key points, some of which build off of points already made by others:
1. As a tablet, this is priced beyond what the market will bear. $1000 and up is too expensive. Anyone remember the Cisco Cius? Battery life is reported to be in the 5-hour range. ... but...
2. If the Surface PRO is being positioned as a laptop replacement, then the price and battery life is not too far off the rest of the laptop market. ... but...
3. On the other hand, as a laptop replacement, the keyboard and mouse become mandatory so the price really starts around $1200, plus a couple of hundred for Office so we're looking at $1400-$1500 tablet/laptop. For that kind of money, you could get a decent laptop AND a decent tablet. No compromises.
I'm sorry, but this thing is over-priced and under-batteried for the uses that tablets are best for, and it is over-priced and under-storaged (possibly under-powered also) for the uses that laptops are best for. The flexibility of the Surface allows it to compete in both the tablet and laptop segments, but it is a mid-tier player at best in both. Will there be a new segment defined by the surface? I don't think so. The market is heading in the other direction.
I'm curious why there was no mention of the Intel Atom-based Surface in this article. To me, that one looks more like the sweet spot with a better balance of the key parameters.
P.S. Please congratulate me on not making this another operating system debate. My own personal bias is that even if the Surface were a new god box, it would still be running Windows and Office so it still wouldn't interest me – but others feel differently so that isn't the argument on whether the Surface Pro is a decent product.