Microsoft Surface Duo 3: Broken by Microsoft’s line design

FRONT DESK
5 Min Read
Microsoft Surface Duo 3

Microsoft Surface Duo 3: Broken by Microsoft’s line design

Microsoft Surface Due 3

Microsoft Surface Duo 3: We can all agree at this point that smartphones are a bit boring, at least visually. Of course, every year the specs increase, the cameras get better and the design is pretty much the same. You might occasionally notice slightly rounded or slightly sharp edges and a new camera module shape, but the general look and feel of the smartphone is pretty familiar. That’s why I’m so interested in foldable. They’re a fresh take on a standard form factor that brings a lot of benefits to the table.

Another interesting twist on the concept of what a smartphone is is presented by the Microsoft Surface Duo series. We’ve never had the chance to discuss the latter, but Lenovo’s new release has us revisiting a strange device from Microsoft’s company. It looks like the company has abandoned the Surface Duo in its current form, and if we ever see another product in the series, it will be one that ditches the dual-screen form factor for the world’s flexible display.

In this article, we’ll lay out my case for why the Surface Duo shouldn’t become your average notebook-style foldable and that there’s plenty of untapped potential in the line-up that Microsoft shouldn’t let go of.

Microsoft Surface Duo 2: Unique, but not extraordinary

Let me start by saying that the Microsoft Surface Duo 2 is undoubtedly a very flawed device. It may be a category, but in the world of mobile technology being different is not enough. You have to be better. The Surface Duo 2 had a number of issues that sealed the device’s fate even before its actual launch. More importantly, it had to find a way to differentiate itself from its predecessor, which was, for lack of a better word, a complete failure. You see, the original Surface Duo was under powered at launch due to outdated internals, plagued by unreliable software, and had a pathetic camera.

Worse, Microsoft device had a serious identity crisis. It wants to be a viable smartphone, albeit a very different one. The problem is that Worse, Microsoft device had a serious identity crisis. It wants to be a viable smartphone, albeit a very different one. tried to make the successor a better smartphone as a solution to the problem. This resulted in new complications including a camera bump that made the device a little uncomfortable when turned upside down. Essentially, by making the Duo 2 a better handset, the company made it a worse device overall. And that’s before you take into account the $1499 price tag.

Microsoft Surface Duo form factor

In my view, the winning formula for the Surface Duo 3 is Microsoft’s re imagining of the lineup as a somewhat smaller Surface Neo. The Duo may not be a capable smartphone, but it shouldn’t be a fold able knock-off either. Two separate screens, each roughly the size of an iPad mini 6, joined together in a ‘foldable’ tablet, not marketed as a replacement for your daily driver.

Still, I’ll make one thing clear: for this kind of approach to work, Microsoft should stick with software it’s familiar with. The array can only be saved if the dual-screen form factor is supported by a soft operating system (preferably Windows-based). Users want to seamlessly interact with two smaller displays at once, not just one that splits them in two. Additionally, the Duo should be usable as a traditional compact tablet when folded back.

There are two reasons why this design appeals to me (pun intended). First, it preserves and builds on Microsoft’s original vision for the Surface Duo and Surface Neo. It takes the best of both worlds and adds something. Second, by redesigning the device, it can stop being a gimmick smartphone. Only in this way, the Surface Duo could be something else entirely, and we believe it is Microsoft’s concept.

Read also OnePlus Nord CE 3 Lite 5G: Full Phone Specifications, Features

Share This Article
Leave a comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *