That's pretty much all I wanted out of a Surface Pro X with SQ3, but sadly, that's not what we got. My ideal Surface Pro X successor would have been something that maintains the same thin and seamless design, but with the more powerful SQ3 and a 120Hz display. And I fully admit that these complaints are a serious first world problem, but as someone who bought into the Pro X line for its design, the Pro 9 5G is disappointing. The Surface Pro X had charm that the Surface Pro 9 5G lacks.ĭon't get me wrong, the Microsoft SQ3 is a great upgrade over the SQ2, but I don't think "more performance" is enough reason to change up the perfect design of the Surface Pro X. It's back to being like the older Surface Pros, which I didn't enjoy. The Surface Pro 9 5G feels bigger and heavier, and I enjoy using it less as a result. It still looks like a seam, so the design is less concise compared to the Surface Pro X.
So I don't see why the Surface Pro 9 5G needs to be the same thickness and weight as the Intel Surface Pro 9.Įven the "seam" for the fan on the Intel version is carried over to the Surface Pro 9 5G, just without the actual vents. I've never found the Surface Pro X to have poor battery life or slow performance for the workloads I use it for, nothing that would warrant it being thickened for a bigger battery or better cooling anyway.
But the changes made to Surface Duo 2 were arguably needed, whereas I don't think the same can be said for the Surface Pro X and Surface Pro 9 5G. The Surface Duo 1 is incredibly thin and light, and when compared to the thicker and heavier Surface Duo 2, feels like it's from the future. It's kind of similar to how I feel about the Surface Duo 2 compared to the Surface Duo 1. Surface Pro X (left) and Surface Pro 9 (right) (Image credit: Windows Central)
0 kommentar(er)
