Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 15 Lunar Lake review - A slap in the face for Windows on ARM

[Redaktion]

Last year, Microsoft switched its Surface devices completely to ARM processors from Qualcomm. However, it doesn't seem that business customers want these devices, as the Surface Laptop 15 for Business is now available with Intel's Lunar Lake processors. The result is better in many areas.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Microsoft-Surface-Laptop-7-15-Lunar-Lake-review-A-slap-in-the-face-for-Windows-on-ARM.985263.0.html

[Randy Hill]

This is crazy. Its bad enough that the Surface runs so hot and can't keep up with a fanless MacBook Air, but it costs almost twice as much! Whats going on in the world when an Apple $999 MacBook Air is as well equipped as a slower Surface that lists for $1,699?

[Worgarthe]

Its bad enough that the Surface runs so hot

Hot?

[RobertJasiek]

Apple showed how to upsell. The copycats upsell doubly (plus batteries and repairs).

Apple upsells to rich endconsumers. Microsofts upsells to rich companies.

The financially sensitive buy elsewhere (or Apple's base models, if there is any for a product category). The victims of Nvidia's monopoly suffer or buy less frequently.

[x864EVER]

This proves x86 is king! the LL 15in Surface Laptop has better battery life than the newest m4 MBA 15in and the WoA version of the Surface Laptop while having better gpu performance and comparable CPU performance. performance per watt is also on par (though could be better). the future is and always will be x86.

[Randy Hill]

Apple showed how to upsell. The copycats upsell doubly (plus batteries and repairs).

Apple upsells to rich endconsumers. Microsofts upsells to rich companies.

The financially sensitive buy elsewhere (or Apple's base models, if there is any for a product category). The victims of Nvidia's monopoly suffer or buy less frequently.

Problem is that overall cost of ownership is lower for Macs. They hold their value much better than PCs, so even if you pay more you'll lose less on your resale.

[RobertJasiek]

This resale value myth breaks if one uses devices for as long  as I do - ca. 10 years. Then resale value converges to zero.

[GeorgeS]

Apple showed how to upsell. The copycats upsell doubly (plus batteries and repairs).

Apple upsells to rich endconsumers. Microsofts upsells to rich companies.

The financially sensitive buy elsewhere (or Apple's base models, if there is any for a product category). The victims of Nvidia's monopoly suffer or buy less frequently.

Problem is that overall cost of ownership is lower for Macs. They hold their value much better than PCs, so even if you pay more you'll lose less on your resale.

Indeed.

As I type on my 2013 vintage MBP that is still as speedy as the day I brought it home.

I honestly can't tell you how many WIN powered laptops came and went over the last 12 years. Thankfully now that I'm retired I only 'need' WIN for some Gaming. Period.

[The Werewolf]

The problem, of course, is seeing this as a competition between rival CPU makers and trying to create warring tribes instead of what it actually is and should be: two options for consumers with different needs.

This is where Microsoft screwed up, thinking they could pretend to be Apple and dictate choices to their customers, knowing they'd do whatever was asked of them. Apple is the only OEM for all devices running macOS, iOS and iPadOS. If you want to use those - there's just one source.

But with Microsoft, other than the Surface devices, which are a premium niche product, Microsoft cannot force or in most cases even encourage customers to go in a specific direction (case in point: Win 10 is EOLed in October and still more than 50% of all Windows devices are running it rather than Win 11, and almost all growth of Win 11 market comes from new machine sales).

"Better" is always subjective unless you take into account the end user's specific needs and wants, and most of the time, OEM's definitions of "better" includes a higher price tag, or a way to get you buy a replacement for something you already have that already works well enough.

In the end, as I've said for a LONG time, very few people really need 24hr battery life. If it's included and doesn't cost more, sure - but to pay a serious upcharge? That's a niche market. Same with 4K OLED screens. Arguably better, but also almost always set to 150% or even 200% upscale and adds to the cost. In fact, most of the "essential" features touted by OEMs (and, to be honest, tech bloggers) tend to be features that are definitely nice - but for the vast majority of end users - totally unimportant and expensive.

Windows on ARM isn't a necessity. It solves essentially no problem any normal person has, while creating real world problems no normal person wants. That's not to say it shouldn't be offered - there will be customers for whom it really IS the perfect solution - but the notion that "the future is ARM" is inane. It's one of the hopefully many solutions going into the future.

[The Werewolf]

Problem is that overall cost of ownership is lower for Macs. They hold their value much better than PCs, so even if you pay more you'll lose less on your resale.

Or, if you pay less, then you don't need to resell it because the per item investment is so much lower.

And you're engaging in both the "Apple vs the worst of ALL PCs" and the "My experience is everyone's experience" fallacies.

If you pick the best PC makers, the lifespan of their products are as good as any Apple product. I have a Toshiba convertible from 2010 that works just fine, for example. In fact, I've never had a PC fail. So clearly by your logic, all PCs are perfect. The difference is that with PCs, you have the choice to scale the PC to your needs and choose the device that works best for you. With Apple, you get what they want to give you.

The plural of anecdote is not data. Especially when the anecdote is highly self-selected data. For example, I have a 2018 MacBook Pro and the keyboard on that thing may be the single worst keyboard ever made. It's like typing on rocks. Even the trackpad is pretty grotty and has such bad feedback that tapping on it is, also, a lot like tapping on a rock. But I guess most Apple fans kind of want to forget the wonder of the butterfly keyboard fiasco.

[astolfo]

Problem is that overall cost of ownership is lower for Macs. They hold their value much better than PCs, so even if you pay more you'll lose less on your resale.

Or, if you pay less, then you don't need to resell it because the per item investment is so much lower.

And you're engaging in both the "Apple vs the worst of ALL PCs" and the "My experience is everyone's experience" fallacies.

If you pick the best PC makers, the lifespan of their products are as good as any Apple product. I have a Toshiba convertible from 2010 that works just fine, for example. In fact, I've never had a PC fail. So clearly by your logic, all PCs are perfect. The difference is that with PCs, you have the choice to scale the PC to your needs and choose the device that works best for you. With Apple, you get what they want to give you.

The plural of anecdote is not data. Especially when the anecdote is highly self-selected data. For example, I have a 2018 MacBook Pro and the keyboard on that thing may be the single worst keyboard ever made. It's like typing on rocks. Even the trackpad is pretty grotty and has such bad feedback that tapping on it is, also, a lot like tapping on a rock. But I guess most Apple fans kind of want to forget the wonder of the butterfly keyboard fiasco.

Apple fans like to pretend like they always have been using Apple M chips, and they conveniently forget over a decade of Apple devices being sold with an Intel CPU, at a markup of 40% compared to other similar PC with the same CPU, and thats without accounting for the soldered ram, soldered SSD, and the upgrades that you had to pay for it because their "premium" devices started at 4-8 gb of ram, and with a palstry 128GB ssd. And this was in 2017.

The resale value point is moot, because if you are buying just to resale later, you still end up losing money and Apple gains another sale by doing pretty much nothing. And while their base offerings might be "good" now compared to what they offered just a few months ago, it took them like a decade to move over to something decent, and they did it more due to production costs than good will.

[RobertJasiek]

very few people really need 24hr battery life. If it's included and doesn't cost more, sure - but to pay a serious upcharge? That's a niche market.

Much of your post has been good. I just nitpick this where I disagree. 24h as a direct use value may only be for niche people like me indeed but you miss several points: 24h means having to charge only every few days; 24h indoors means, say, 12h outdoors, which is good for quite a few more people; 24h initially means 6 ~ 12h after several years of battery degradation still without necessity for replacement.

The attempted upselling is a cardinal sin, of course. A battery is just a battery.

[PPA]

I like your reports very much, but I have to strongly disagree on your comment related to fan noise.
I have on my desk a Surface Laptop 2 i7 for 6 years and a Surface Laptop 4 i5 for 4 years, and my laptop 7 Lunar Lake Ultra 7 266V 2.20 GHz is by far the quieter one.
Almost never quick on the fan compared to the other ones while doing the same type of work.
I loved the quietness this laptop 7 gave me.
Not every processor comes with the same on specs data in term of core performance, and you might have tested a one unit at the bottom of the temperature spec.
Some other reviews show otherwise and agreed very much to my observations (bit.ly/4c2Ffxi, bit.ly/4iW8iF1)
Paul

[Worgarthe]

very few people really need 24hr battery life. If it's included and doesn't cost more, sure - but to pay a serious upcharge? That's a niche market.

24h as a direct use value may only be for niche people like me indeed but you miss several points: 24h means having to charge only every few days; 24h indoors means, say, 12h outdoors, which is good for quite a few more people; 24h initially means 6 ~ 12h after several years of battery degradation still without necessity for replacement.

0-80% goes in 30-45 minutes, so if you don't have that much time in your day to plug in once then you are doing something seriously wrong for your health.

[TalynOne]

I know of a few people who bought both the Intel and ARM version and return the Intel version. Intel version suffers problems all Intel based laptops do. Fans turn on too often, it gets too hot too often and basic usage isn't smooth.

The only thing is ARM is worse at is gaming, but why are you gaming on an Ultrabook? Even on a gaming laptop you make huge sacrifices in heat, weight and battery life. The niche app compatibility is just that, niche, it doesn't apply to 95% of app usage.