Wednesday Links -- Absolutely "Nothing" At The WSJ Today

WSJ Links

Section D:

• After seeing the Surface tablet at the Microsoft store in a south coast mall (California), I was curious to see what Walt Mossberg had to say about Windows 8 or the Surface. I think he has written about the Surface and was "okay" with it, but I don't remember the specifics. I may even be wrong about saying he's reviewed the Surface. Having said that, Walt Mossberg has a big story, a review of Windows 8, in today's Wall Street Journal. I don't think it's good news for Microsoft. 

Section A:

• Lawmakers fail to fix Illinois pension gap.

  Illinois lawmakers failed to address the deepest public-pension shortfall in the nation Tuesday, unable to come to an agreement before a new legislature is sworn in.

  "All that happens is the problem gets bigger and the solutions get more challenging," said Elaine Nekritz, a Democratic state representative and co-author of a failed bill that called for a freeze in the annual cost-of-living increase for public-sector retirees.

**********************

Wow, talk about a slow day in the WSJ. 

Yes, here's Walter Mossberg's review of the Surface: I Like The Microsoft Surface Tablet, But I've Got Some Big Complaints About It --

And while he sounds positive about the Surface, he seems to have some major problems with it, such as:

• There's a "paucity" of apps, with just 5,000 to start.
• Battery life is "mediocre," only getting 7 hours of life, versus the iPad which gets 10. 
• The screen is worse than the iPad.
• The one megapixel camera is really bad.
• The mail app needs improvement. It doesn't support POP email, and it doesn't have a unified inbox, allowing people to have mulitple email addresses.

Now I see why I couldn't remember Mossberg's review of the Surface. It was done on video and I generally do not read news stories on the net on video -- takes way too long. One cannot scan a video. Also, with print media, the most important stuff is generally put at the top. In a video, there's a lot of fluff during the introduction. In addition, a video interview cannot be edited the same way a print article can be edited to keep it "tight."