What's new

Surface Book design problem?

hughlle

Super Moderator
Staff member
surely you can just lift the screen a touch and all is well (can't describe it in simple terms).

To me it looks no difference to the argument that the SP3 kickstand was badly designed because the surface wobbled. All you had to do was press down on the surface and the two hinges would align.
 
OP
M

mike_msf

New Member
surely you can just lift the screen a touch and all is well (can't describe it in simple terms).

To me it looks no difference to the argument that the SP3 kickstand was badly designed because the surface wobbled. All you had to do was press down on the surface and the two hinges would align.

Surely lifting the screen a touch won't help because as you can see on the pictures, the screen is already almost 90 degree. It makes no sense to be careful each time you open the lid to avoid the hinge being underneath the rubber stripe.

Your claims are not justified and confirmed vs. actual proof we can see on the pictures from the article.
 

CMD

Member

The Hinge in that picture is clearly bent or defective. Each wedge should slightly higer than the next one. And the gap between wedges and the uni-body should each be the same. (the red circle should look like the yellow)
upload_2016-2-27_9-31-3.png


Should be
1483740237003373972.gif
 

hughlle

Super Moderator
Staff member
Hence my suggestion of just re-aligning the hinge. The whole point of a fulcrum is there is a lot of flexibility. You just have to open it properly. Hence linking to the kickstand which could be argued is also flawed, all it takes is knowing how to actually use it.

The more likely answer is that it has been opened like that intentionally, because controversy creates clicks, clicks make money. If it was such a significant issue then I really think we would be reading about it a fair bit on this forum, given the nature of this forum. First I've heard of it though.
 
OP
M

mike_msf

New Member
Hence my suggestion of just re-aligning the hinge. The whole point of a fulcrum is there is a lot of flexibility. You just have to open it properly. Hence linking to the kickstand which could be argued is also flawed, all it takes is knowing how to actually use it.

The more likely answer is that it has been opened like that intentionally, because controversy creates clicks, clicks make money. If it was such a significant issue then I really think we would be reading about it a fair bit on this forum, given the nature of this forum. First I've heard of it though.

I think you're wrong, but I'm not sure where you got all the wrong information from. Are you Sureface Book user yourself? If you were, you would know it's not possible to re-align the hinge. You can either open it or close. Moving in any position is not possible as it's not flexible. Of course the mechanism looks like it, but in fact it's just a regular method to move the screen in different angels. And the first part of the hinge, just as @CMD mentioned is in a wrong place. And it will be there, in the same position no matter how many times you would open and close the lid.

It's not my point to argue with you just for fun, but in fact I believe that the problem described by the author exists. It might be a defective unit tho.
 

Wayne Orwig

Active Member
"Serious" flaw. Not really.
Something that could use cleaning up in the design. Sure.
Never buy release one of ANYTHING if that kind of thing bothers you. If it does bother you, you can buy a 'skin' that includes vinyl strips to protect the metal ribs on the hinge.
 
OP
M

mike_msf

New Member
"Serious" flaw. Not really.
Something that could use cleaning up in the design. Sure.
Never buy release one of ANYTHING if that kind of thing bothers you. If it does bother you, you can buy a 'skin' that includes vinyl strips to protect the metal ribs on the hinge.

Well, yes. Some might buy skin, but some might say it's unacceptable to use such workarounds for a $2.700 worth device.
 

Yillbs

Member
Well, yes. Some might buy skin, but some might say it's unacceptable to use such workarounds for a $2.700 worth device.

$2,700 * not $2.700 a period when discussing cash implies this is only 2 dollars and 70 cents. Which is obviously not correct.
 

Yillbs

Member
Top