Re: Hurray, Merry Christmas
"You missed one more reason to get a Surface - vertical industries and especially development for them. You can immediately test your stuff for real while having a decent environment and a keyboard to debug. This is something you do not get with Android or iThings because they are strictly "build on your desk(top), debug in an emulator, run on your slab"."
The last part of that comment is simply wrong (you you can of course debug on your slab and are in no way restricted to debugging on your emulator) and the implication you are trying to make about the decency of the development environment is also misleading - or at least highly partisan. All these platforms offer highly capable and mature IDEs.
Of course there are strong opinions about IDE's which mostly, IMO involve tribal loyalties based on some fuzzy algorithm based on what you use the most and started with first rather than rationally and objectively which is best. I think Visual Studio has a reputation as a rock solid IDE, whereas xCode for iOS/OS X in its latest incarnation is also fantastically good (really, I guess, this shouldn't be a surprise because all the clever bods at MS Apple and Google are highly invested in refining how the IDE's work) . MS Visual Studio is highly capable mature and has excellent code completion but really today there is nothing to distinguish MS Visual Studio and Xcode (even in terms of code completion or most other terms).
I personally prefer Xcode's philosophy for integrating UI design (where Storyboards provide freeze dried, or archived, views directly equivalent to the real thing). I found Visual Studio's philosophy of generated code a little flawed (hide code if you can't maintain it through edit cycles), but really I can see this with this I am splitting hairs.
I love both MS for innovating and leading the way with the introduction of the excellent and intellectually pure C# and Apple for taking up the challenge and producing the, arguably, more practical and so damned fast, flexible and powerful SWIFT. Really both those languages are a MASSIVE credit to their respective companies (and I think you will find both the C# and SWIFT teams have a great deal of mutual respect).
But mostly I think you have made one of those comments that sounds like it is making an important "knockout" point until you start trying to think of a Use Case for what you are describing. When you are developing you generally want to be in an office environment and with as few interruptions as possible. Development requires focus and concentration and isn't something you want to have to do in the field. So what you are saying has appeal until you really look at where development is done and done best.
Also the advantage of being able to develop on the device isn't much of an advantage when, as a developer, you generally want the largest screen avaialble, preferably dual monitor with the fastest processor. Sure the surface pro is a capable dual device and can be connected up to additional monitors, but as a developer you generally want the fastest machine available, so will err towards a beefier desktop class laptop/machine.
Also, importantly, developing on an emulator for 95 percent of the time is superior because you can have a desktop class CPU running it (so it's trés fast it's only when you reach the end of the development cycle and when doing performance optimisation that running natively on the app offers an advantage). It's an advantage to be able to run the simulator and your IDE on separate screens with all the windows nicely arranged. Of course there is a danger of failing to run your code sufficiently frequently outside of the simulator, but actually that danger also stands testament to just how damned good the simulated environments are for iOS and Android (which as said you don't have to use anyway) and the danger is easily mitigated by employing best practice.
There is an advantage to be had, for if you want to debug an application in the field (though generally you would be doing such at the end of your development cycle and generally any advantage this offers is restricted to a smallish subset of apps). I can see some value there, but by the time we get to that, the point you are making has been somewhat marginalised. So yes, kinda, its a nice option, and you wouldn't say no, but overall its nothing like as big an advantage as your comment seems to imply.