Should Microsoft just put Android on Surface Neo?

Surface Neo
Surface Neo (Image credit: Windows Central)

In October 2019, Microsoft wowed the tech world with two new devices: Surface Duo and Surface Neo. Both were similar devices with dual screens, but Surface Duo was a phone running Android while Surface Neo was meant to be a new era of PC running Windows 10X — itself a new OS built for the experience.

A lot has changed since that fall. Surface Duo did come out nearly a year later, but it had a very rough start (something that has finally improved with Surface Duo 2). But Surface Neo, which was also supposed to come out "holiday 2020," never materialized.

Much of Surface Neo's limbo status is due to the abandonment of Windows 10X. As the pandemic gained ground, Microsoft refocused and doubled down on its desktop OS, merging the design of Windows 10X into a new OS dubbed Windows 11. The strategy worked: Windows 11 is a hit and has helped to reinvigorate the PC industry at the right time.

But what should happen with Surface Neo's hardware? Should Microsoft just put Android on it and make it a bigger brother of Surface Duo? There are some excellent reasons to do so. And a few reasons why it shouldn't.

Foldable PCs are a lot bigger

Source: Daniel Rubino / Windows Central (Image credit: Source: Daniel Rubino / Windows Central)

The first foldable PC is Lenovo's ThinkPad X1 Fold. It's a device that I play with occasionally, but I have had difficulty getting into my workflow. When opened, the X1 Fold's 13.3-inch flexible QXGA (2048x1536) OLED is super impressive, but it's just too small to use as a laptop. Despite the appeal, it's also not light at 2.2lbs (999g), making it not that comfortable to hold as a book for long periods.

Interestingly, the next-gen of foldable PCs arriving later this year are much more significant. These will feature screens in the 16 to 17-inch range (e.g. ASUS ZenBook 17 Fold) and, when folded as laptops, will be closer to a 13-inch one making them a bit more natural. While you won't want to hold a 17-inch folding PC for long in one hand, you could prop the screen up to have a portable 17-inch PC with you, which is intriguing.

On the other hand, Surface Neo features two 9-inch screens that create a 13.1-inch one when fully spanned. It bucks the trend of where foldable PCs are headed.

And there's still this lingering issue: Windows 11 is not great as a tablet OS. And, as of right now, there are no features in Windows 11 that leverage dual- or foldable displays (although Snap Assist helps).

In short, while I find foldable PCs curious, my X1 Fold experience has left me skeptical of its usefulness as a laptop replacement. Microsoft is going to have to do much more to convince me otherwise.

Surface Neo with Android could make sense

Surface Duo 2020

Source: Daniel Rubino / Windows Central (Image credit: Source: Daniel Rubino / Windows Central)

With no Windows 10X on the horizon, the case for a dual-screen PC seems to fall flat as the OS is not optimized for it. Technically, neither is Android, but that's changing with Android 12L due later this year. Moreover, Microsoft already has experience improving Android for dual screens with Surface Duo and Surface Duo 2. In fact, it's getting pretty good at it. With Android app development poised to start optimizing for a larger screen, dual-screen, and foldable displays, the ecosystem is ahead of where Windows is right now.

Now, I'm no fan of Android on tablets, but tossing that OS onto Surface Neo with a dash of 5G makes the Surface Neo a lot more viable. Microsoft could still preload it with its growing cadre of Android apps and services, and, in effect, it'd just be a giant Surface Duo for those who want more screen real estate on the go. That's an easier sell, especially for those who desire a secondary device and don't want to replace their phone.

Related to this, Microsoft has made some recent moves to consolidate its Android efforts. Its latest reorg puts Android development as a core within the larger Microsoft Devices and Experiences group. It also seems to be hiring many more Android developers. In other words, its ambitions in the Android space seem more extensive than its current offerings.

A dangerous game?

Surface Neo

Source: Microsoft (Image credit: Source: Microsoft)

Of course, the risks here are not lost on me either, especially for Windows. In a previous 2019 interview with The Verge, executive VP and Chief Product Officer, Panos Panay asks "… what's the right operating system for the form factor?" when talking about Surface Duo. He answers his question with "…in this case, on mobile devices, Android's the obvious choice. But anything above that, Windows is everything." Later, when asked about putting Android on Surface Neo, Panay has an interesting response:

Yeah, I don't see that. I can see my road map. I can see it three years out, and I'm not, like, "I've had visions." I can, like, physically see it, the road map. We have every iteration of these products out there. I think what you're saying is not where I'm seeing things.At the end of the day, Windows is doing its job well. It's incredible, literally for anything bigger than this device. Now, anything bigger in between Neo and Duo, I think, is stuck. So when I say anything bigger, I don't see anything smaller than 2.9 inches, and I don't see anything bigger than this. When we picked this product, we literally looked for years at screen sizes. What's the right thing to do?

Panay doubles down on Windows as the right choice for Surface Neo. But those comments were made before Windows 10X was axed, and the decision to push 17-inch foldable PCs came to light. How has thinking evolved now that those things have changed? Of course, we may never know unless Microsoft decides to resurrect Surface Neo either with Android or some optimized version of Windows 11.

But if Microsoft pursues Android, the risk is evident as it starts to bleed into the area where Windows is supposed to be dominant and undercuts previous messaging. It also acknowledges what is becoming more and more apparent: Android is the superior mobile OS, whereas Windows is the better desktop (and proper laptop) solution.

This discussion raises the fundamental question: What is Surface Neo — a tablet or a laptop? Because how you answer determines which OS is the better fit.

So, what to do about Surface Neo? I'm not entirely sure. Ideally, Microsoft would have a fantastic mobile version of Windows optimized for dual screens ready to go. But they don't, and we haven't heard anything to suggest they do. That's the reality here. While far from my first choice, Android makes sense from a development and marketing point of view, especially if you think of Neo as a tablet or just a bigger Surface Duo rather than a laptop.

On the other hand, maybe Surface Neo should not exist at all — it's a device too in-between to be anything.

Daniel Rubino
Editor-in-chief

Daniel Rubino is the Editor-in-chief of Windows Central, head reviewer, podcast co-host, and analyst. He has been covering Microsoft since 2007 when this site was called WMExperts (and later Windows Phone Central). His interests include Windows, laptops, next-gen computing, and for some reason, watches. Before all this tech stuff, he worked on a Ph.D. in linguistics, watched people sleep (for medical purposes!), and ran the projectors at movie theaters because it was fun.

116 Comments
  • Why not simply add all that Windows 10X was to Windows 11 for foldables and Two screen devices? They already have made some of that
  • In theory, that could happen if they wanted. But then they also need to redo the APIs and dev guidance so that apps can leverage dual screens (e.g.spanned), but even then Win32 apps won't work that way making it a limitation on its usefulness. It's why the original plan for 10X didn't have native Win32 support and relied more on UWP. It's also not clear that running a "classic" Win32 app on a 9-inch display is going to be a good user experience.
  • Didn't Microsoft quickly say the Neo was going to support Win32 apps though? I'm sure it was going to have Win32 Office. They couldn't really sell it without.
  • You're confusing things a bit. Yes, Windows 10X runs Win32 apps, but no on it running them natively. Win32 apps are virtualized (VAIL) and run in a container, separating them from the OS. Indeed, there were plans to ship a low-cost version of Windows 10X without VAIL because the system can be abstracted away. The experience was likely to be similar to running classic apps on ARM. They're supposed to be the fallback app experience, not the primary. Windows 10X was, effectively, a UWP OS that could run virtualized WIn32 apps. Windows 10 is a win32 OS that can UWP apps. How good 10X was at running WIn32, unfortunately, we'll never know. I just know that CPU, at the time, was not that great (it's similar to what is in the X1 Fold, IIRC).
  • That quote about the 3-year road map hits hard when you realize we're in that 3rd year and it seems like very little of that road map came to fruition. (Duo made it, Neo is lost in the wild, 10x went away, etc.) As for the article, I'm not sure I'd want Neo without Windows. Part of the push with incoming W11 releases is to improve tablet support, right? If so, a Neo in 2023 wtih a Windows 11 that actually is friendly and usable on tablets would be my preference.
  • It's better for everyone if Neo is delayed until W11 has tablet support. Frankly, I doubt Android 12L will do much in terms of actual desktop use in terms of apps. Sure, it will make headway in terms more basic productivity tasks. Beyond that? Not much. As I said awhile back, Microsoft is going to hit the wall that is Google's tendrils and Microsoft's own stupidity. They are really about to hit the latter as instead of buckling down on WoA and making that viable as well reinforcing UWA and Containerised Win32 with ARM64EC they have chosen the ostrich approach in hopes all their troubles go away with Android. They won't, in fact it's going to make things hell of alot worse as they will also be losing a lucrative Hololens contract. What good is hardware when Microsoft is continuing to literally blow off their own limbs by throwing the underpinning software and app platform out of the window? Microsoft must focus WoA and W11 on ARM derivative as opposed to continuing to buckling down with Android. The longer they dither, the more of a hole they put themselves into - then they will be at the mercy of Googles tendrils and monopolistic practises. If they thought Google's antics with Microsoft's youtube app was somewhat childish... then they ain't seen nothing yet.
  • What Microsoft YouTube app? Microsoft has shown over the past few years WoA is not a focus sadly. I love my Surface Pro X but it always get lower priority. Agreed on Containerising Win32. There needs to be some way to allow Win32 apps to run but without all the bloat Windows 11 has. We're used to this on laptops. We wouldn't accept it on tablets. Even that Surface Pro X is a laptop with an occasional use tablet.
  • Years ago Microsoft created a YouTube app for WP that didn't meet Google's requirements, and Google made them discontinue it. Microsoft was free to create a YouTube app, but WP didn't support the technology Google required. It was something like that. Microsoft didn't follow the terms and Google made them stop.
  • @bleached Oh so arbitrarily applying one set of requirements for one app and not enforcing on others is just fine and dandy with you lol...
  • Who else was making a YouTube client?
  • It wasn't the technology that held back the MS YouTube app. It was not incorporating Googles ad and intrusion services. It was a cleaner version of YouTube that didn't include value added for Google.
  • If I remember correctly, Google required them to use HTML5 and WP didn’t support it.
  • Improve yes but it's all cosmetic changes. Windows is still poor on tablets.
  • No no no no
    Please put windows 11 in it !
    I have use the surface duo and the duo 2 and they are awful.
    If you want the android apps put windows 11 and you can install android apps from the Amazon store don’t put android on the neo please!!
  • No! Stick with Windows 11. I have a greater need for a Laptop / Surface computer than I will ever have for an Android tablet. Windows is already optimized for dual screens.
  • But Windows 11 (and all its apps) aren't optimized for this hardware design. Android 12L is. I see you also consider Surface Neo a laptop, even though, in that configuration, it's smaller than a Surface Go. Are you sure you want to use that as your laptop? It's going to have an underpowered and fanless Intel CPU in it, at least, that was the original plan. I think, long term, the better and more realistic plan is just to have a Surface Pro that folds in half.
  • True regarding Windows 11 tablet optimizations. They do need to do a much better job when it is used in that configuration. For what I would use it for though leans more towards the device's laptop heritage (thin client connections; Office 365, Obsidian.... etc). Surprising it is slightly larger than the Go.
  • I wouldn't by a Surface Neo no matter what OS was on it. Those two little bumps on your keyboard to orientate your hands over the keyboard; they are way more important than the makers of Neo realized. I believe Neo is a failed form factor and Microsoft realized that in its testing.
  • Are you expecting Neo to be announced with Android? You say you haven't heard anything, but WC released very similar articles about Duo with Android months before the announcement. Android makes the most sense for Neo hardware, but why would Microsoft do that? To sell hardware? Does Microsoft really want to be a hardware manufacturer? Maybe Neo is too small. They could make an even larger version for Windows. Two Surface Pro X with a hinge may work well with Windows.
  • "Android makes the most sense for Neo hardware, but why would Microsoft do that?" Good question. My guess would be, to have some sort of foot in the small tablet market as a test for how the form factor *might* fit into a productivity workflow. Of course that's assuming they'd actually do it. "Maybe Neo is too small." For me that was the obvious takeaway. It doesn't fit the market anymore, so they should think about a bigger version if they're thinking about this at all anymore.
  • "but why would Microsoft do that?" A pertinent question. It makes sense to have an Android phone so that they have a tow in the phone market. They're not competing with any Windows devices there. An Android tablet, on the other hand, would be competing directly with Windows devices. The target market wouldn't be exactly the same but there would be significant overlap. They might decide that they just don't want to waste all the work on the Neo hardware and use Android as a way to get it out there but Microsoft's history suggests that they wouldn't do it just for that reason.
  • OR Microsoft can continue to work at making Windows 11 also a great tablet OS and still keep all the power of a desktop OS? Wasn’t that the whole point of Windows 11 to be touch friendlier? You know otherwise what is the point of the Surface Pro, Surface Go and hopefully (SQ3) Surface Pro X Does Microsoft know what their doing?
  • "Does Microsoft know what their doing?" MS market cap: $2.23 T
  • "Wasn’t that the whole point of Windows 11 to be touch friendlier?"
    Absolutely not. The point of Windows 11 was to meet modern work demands in a post-COVID, hybrid-work world. Where creativity, focus, and video calls are a priority. Making the OS more touch-friendly is something that is slowly happening, but it's certainly not "the whole point," nor would I consider it a priority.
    "You know otherwise what is the point of the Surface Pro, Surface Go and hopefully (SQ3) Surface Pro X"
    The value in those designs is the ability to get the keyboard out of the way to make it easier to use the pen for drawing and inking, which is a core feature of Windows and Surface (it's where the name originated from). It's also convenient for watching movies or giving presentations. The real question is how many people are buying Surface Pro, Surface Go, or Pro X and not buying the keyboard because they perceive it as optional because these devices are so good at being tablets. My guess is that number is extremely low.
  • My guess is that perceived that these Surface Pro are just laptops with detachable (optional) keyboard. It doesn't help that for a long time now, Microsoft marketed them as a laptop and for long Windows 10 didn't made any more improvements to the tablet user experience. They even made Tablet Mode more hidden and it doesn't automatically switch when you detach the keyboard, it's there but not automatic. So for those years, it basically nails to most consumers that Surface Pro were not a tablet. Heck we deployed Surface Pro for some for staff in our office and didn't even realize that Surface Pro is a touchscreen device. Thought that may be partially at fault for us in the IT not all communicating what it really is.
  • This is a massive brain scratcher for sure as all roads to point to petty office politics. I mean why on earth would Microsoft risk torpedoing a lucrative hololens contract and massive profits? Think about it, The Surface Neo is first and foremost a tablet and to bring the best out of that hardware you need a tablet o/s therefore naturally you want to be improving the tablet experience in Windows. To provide a value add and monetisation route you'd focus on UWA and containerised WIn32 with ARM64EC. As by docking the Surface Neo there is the avenue of being able to have a desktop experience using Continuum. With win32 containerisation you get all the win32 apps into the store for easy access, one click install / deployment. Which also allows additional hardware sales like the continuum docks, miracast docks etc. The only reason webtop and dex never took off is because android spps do not scale to large screen easily nor did either have robust ecosystem of win32 apps to leverage - Microsoft does. This could be packaged with Windows 365, Office 365 etc to the business and education sector. Given many will already have Office 365 packages already so tremendous opportunity to upsell. Naturally to get into the people will want to monetise and so you'd attract more UWA development. Combined with external factors such as energy prices - naturally people will want their devices to last longer on a single charge so there would be a slow progression towards PWA, UWA and ARM64EC. So, ultimately Hololens would have a robust ecosystem to rely on. Which would bring alot of revenue YoY.... But... Microsoft is currently in ostrich mode... So other then petty office politics - it makes no damn sense at all. Then again Microsoft and common sense have never been close associates.
  • "it's where the name originated from" Sorry, but hard no. Surface was a totally revolutionary idea of human to machine interaction, back in the years when Microsoft was working toward the evolution of personal computing with a vision. It might have been too Sci-Fi as a vision, but still a vision it was. Surface prototypes meant wyou'd put you cell phone on the display table to open up interaction thru the OS and, for instance, browse photos into picture gallery and download them. Or you could place your debit card on the display to check-out your online payment or your flight reservation. Then you could also use ink (and other widgets.)
    Of that vision remains maybe some show-off in a LV casino... and lots of rubbles culminated with the W Mobile failure. Why? Just because they were not able to put the win32 legacy crap in a closet and be done with it. At the same time, Apple has moved thru 3 different CPU architectures and OS's without backing down when customers cry wolf because their old Adobe Photoshop copy does not work.
  • Do we know if the Surface line's name comes from that original MS Surface Table concept? I too had seen that back in Vegas around the time of the iPhone launch (before it I think, but not certain). I was on a quest to create a rugged multi-touch gaming system. I've never heard a clear history on the name progression, but the technology used in modern Surfaces is very different -- those table Surface systems used cameras to support multi-point touch, requiring substantial depth (nothing you could fit in a phone or PC). Multi-touch was near nonexistent except in concept devices like the original Surface table until Apple released the capacitive multi-touch iPhone. I can't tell you how many touchscreen manufacturers told me that multi-touch in a thin frame was impossible, defied the laws of physics, maybe you could get up to 2-finger touch AT MOST, etc. right up until the iPhone launched.
  • This is the most anti-fanboy article I've read in a long time. Tough love I guess. My respect to the author for trying to be honest.
  • I'd like to think that they'd hold off on the Neo for as long as it takes to get Windows 11 to a place where it would work well on the form factor. The Duo must surely be a one-off in terms of choosing an "outsider" operating system for a Surface device. As a Duo 2 user, I'm OK-ish with android on my device, primarily because I need mobile apps and Google has them, but in my heart I'd still download windows to my device if I had the option, and hope PWA's, Microsoft services and the Windows store would be enough to fill the app void.
  • Definitely no. In fact, I'm watching closely those working on a Windows port for Duo. I'd like that much better.
  • It will never actually be usable. Even if they get all the hardware working, Windows just isn’t designed for a small dual touchscreen. Battery life will be measured in minutes, like the WoA 950, while being even less usable.
  • No, they should see how they can run both at the same time preferably. If not, Windows is still the better OS for such a device.
  • That's rather non-elegant solution. It will have disjoint UX to have run both Android shell with Windows shell. Why not just improve Windows to be a better usable and enjoyable tablet OS? The fact now it can run Android apps anyways, at least the app part is kinda addressed already.
  • They screwed up putting Duo as Android, but if they really want to kill off Windows then hey why not pop Android on a Neo!
  • Windows 11 is a failure, I'm very disappointed in this upgrade. It feels like a downgrade.
  • It's a "failure" because you don't like it? Sorry but the market as a whole disagrees with you. Stop thinking your personal feelings and opinions represent everyone or an entire community. That's dangerous.
  • No. No. No.
  • No. Microsoft's time of innovation was squandered with butterfingered incompetence. Now everything that was amazing about their now cancelled devices is done by the competition. Let them putter along as a future nobody. Microsoft hasn't had the backbone and perseverance to play the long game in so very, very long. Nothing exciting. No new ideas. Android makes you the product anyway.
  • I would still buy the Neo if they were to release it, with Android. I still believe they should go the Samsung route. Though microsoft was first with the Continuum feature in Windows Phone, Samsung took the idea and made better use via DeX. Microsoft could install Android onto the Neo then have a desktop solution that mimicks Windows with its UX though with full Android app availability. We need to stop desiring Microsoft make a one-all device to please everyone and just make a variety of devices to pick from. Similar to a car manufacturer, you get a variety to choose which is best for your situation. If a Neo w/Android isn't for you, then get a Surface Pro/X or SLS. Apple seems to manage the situation in having iPadOS and MacOS, two differing OS's that have some similarity but if you desire an Apple touch screen with a limited desktop experience, then you get the iPad. The thing for Microsoft to do, and to do well, is to help develop Android so the synergy of it and Windows can communicate much better than it currently does. As long as I can move my attention across devices without delay, then I wouldn't care which OS I'm using at the moment. I have an iPhone 13 Pro, iPad Pro M1, Surface Pro X, and Surface Duo 2. When I'm using Edge on any of them, what is great for me is that I can go into my Collections and get what I need instantly regardless of which device I'm using. Microsoft is a software company, Windows isn't the only software they create and maintain. Just make sure I have real-time access to Microsoft 365 across the board with no hiccups, make sure my Surface Duo 2 talks to my Surface Pro X as well as an iOS/iPadOS device talks to a MacOS computer and I'll be content. If I'm desiring a Chevy Silverado, I'm not going to complain to GM that I can't get what I want from Buick....... OPTIONS!!!!
  • Android manufacturers had made continuum like features and lapdocks years before Microsoft.
  • Really? DEX was released in 2017. You could already by a Microsoft Display Dock which connected Windows Phones via USB C in 2015. You could do wireless continuum before that.
  • Yes, really. The Motorola Atrix from 2010 or 2011 had an optional lapdock (dumb terminal) with a desktop Firefox browser. The idea was good but the silicon of the era wasn’t up to snuff yet.
  • I may be wrong, but I don't think the Atrix concept gave you anything but a big monitor and keyboard for your phone apps, desktop Firefox not withstanding. Both Dex and Continuum provide a substantially different environment once the larger peripherals are attached.
  • It switched to Linux when you plugged it in.
  • 😂😂😂
    Why Android suck on bigger screens. 😂 I preached you everybody so be a surprise this October. Today's talk about a tablet mode for Windows 11. That's the best device to launch it on that's what they doing with the device
  • It is fine on Neo sized machines, much better than Windows, and is getting better with 12L. Windows needs 10-11” or more and a hardware keyboard to be good.
  • Hey, Phone link just pinged my Surface 7 running windows 10 saying my phone as now 90% charged. Helpful. Is that what you call OS integration? Why does this matter? Well, it is late, I need to get up early to catch a flight and I want my phone charged. Now I know that in just a few minutes I can close the Surface pro and go to sleep. Neo looks cool. Not sure if Android is a solution to power a large dual screen device. But Bleached thinks foldable is the future. If he is correct, shouldn't MSFT get Windows 11 optimized for foldable devices? I think foldable devices will be mainstream in 2023. Not sure how many units will sell. But if the OS works wonders for a foldable, then the Windows ecosystem will transition into a new form factor/device utility upgrade cycle. Like Windows did from the PC to the Laptop. Windows did not transition from PC to Laptop to Mobile. But it could trasnition from PC to Laptop to Foldable.
  • Windows 11 has most of Windows 10X functionality, and tablet specific features are coming to 11. Why look backwards? it's better to move forward, and push the software and hardware. Windows 11 on an Arm platform could be perfect because it would give users the option of a dual boot if needed, but if there is going to be something like a Neo, it's going to be an utterly simply being a duo. Let the duo handle that, and let the Neo expand Windows 11 capability, that's what the surface line is actually for anyway
  • "Windows 11 has most of Windows 10X functionality, and tablet specific features are coming to 11. Why look backwards?"
    It's important to remember that Windows 10X wasn't just about UI/UX, but, architecturally, it was very different from Windows 10/11. For instance, it didn't have native Win32 support (though it could emulate) and relied on UWP. It was, in some ways, a "lighter" OS. After all, the CPU for Neo is not very strong as it's a thin and fanless system. See, that's the issue. You need apps that leverage dual screens, like spanning. You can do that with UWP/modern apps with the right APIs in place, which is what 10X was setting up. But, you can't do this with Win32 apps, which 1. Won't span 2. Are likely not going to work well on a single 9-inch display. These are issues that need to be addressed even if Microsoft makes Windows 11 more touch/tablet friendly, at least for a dual-screen device. This is where Android has a leg up since Android 12L does all of this and is close to shipping. And Android apps are far more likely to leverage fodlable/dual-screen formats than Windows app dev, which seems, at best, a bit stagnated.
  • Every issue you talked about can be addressed with Win 11. Especially the screen Spanning. The fact that Win 11 has far better screen management can go to this. Windows 11 doesnt need to be lighter. Arm and X86 hardware have evolved enough to handle and offer quick performance. Windows 11 is better at multitasking than Android is, and already supports dual screen... because it supports multi screens already Windows on arm already supports win32 apps through emulation, and can be made to support Android apps more natively. Windows 11 makes more sense here
  • Foldable, dual touchscreens are not the same as supporting dual 27” monitors. Far from it. Windows barely supports a single 9” touchscreen, let alone 2. Windows 11 is probably years away from working well on Neo, and then it wouldn’t have any apps anyways. Microsoft squandered the last decade. They really don’t have any good options today.
  • "Foldable, dual touchscreens are not the same as supporting dual 27” monitors" From a UI standpoint, no it's not. Because at their core, the Duo and Neo, were two separate touchscreens in the foldable devices. There are LITERALLY devices out right now (lenovo's idea pad device comes to mind) that demonstrate this functionality, and run on Windows 11. They do have good options, It's called, Arm, Windows on Arm, Windows 11 on a device
  • Windows 11 does need to be lighter. Why do you think they were making WIndows 10X and not just adding this stuff to Windows 10? The OS has a completely different app layer with containers resulting in better security, lower CPU usage, and better battery life. Did you even read any of the 10X documentation on the design? It's all explained there. Saying Microsoft can address all of this in Windows 11 suggests they are actively working on it. No evidence they are. Neo is as thin as Duo (5.5mm). It needs a lighter OS and a very power-efficient CPU to be pulled off, otherwise, it'll get too hot and have 3 hours of battery life. I don't think you appreciate how thin it is.
  • It needs to be ARM. A slightly slower but much more efficient chip would be preferable instead of the 8cx Gen 3.
  • ARM solves the CPU issue, for sure, but now we come back to the OS problem, which is Windows 11 doesn't currently support dual-screens (like this), nor are there any apps (besides Microsoft's own) that take advantage of the form factor.
  • I don't understand why you say Windows 11 doesn't support dual screens. Dual screens are just two monitors and Windows has supported that (almost) forever. Arguably Windows supports two screens better than what they did on the DUO. At least I don't loose pixels in Windows. I get that the functionality of how apps use the space needs to be adjusted, but they had to do that for Android as well. Some things might even provide better functionality in full sized Windows. Imagine if you have Outlook full screen and click a link. Wouldn't it be nice if that opened on the second monitor, if you have one, rather than in a Window obscuring Outlook? Certainly needs some use case thought here, and maybe some user selectable options, but understanding and developing for small dual screen devices might be applicable to multi-monitor setups.
  • Why do you think they were making WIndows 10X and not just adding this stuff to Windows 10? "Were" past tense. There's alot of accomplishment in Tech that has changed since the Neo and 10X were announced nearly 3 years ago. Did you even read any of the 10X documentation on the design? It's all explained there.
    Yes I did. It doesn't matter now because it was scrapped, and lot of those features exist in Windows 11. Neo is as thin as Duo (5.5mm). It needs a lighter OS and a very power-efficient CPU to be pulled off, otherwise, it'll get too hot and have 3 hours of battery life. I don't think you appreciate how thin it is. And at the time, the Neo was running a custom intel chip that was cancelled, this was the primary reason why the NEO was cancelled correct? We have a very efficient CPU, that's ARM. If Microsoft wanted it could partner wit somebody and create a very efficient, yet powerful CPU for it....like they did with the Surface X. As far as lightness of the OS, and power consumption, I don't see this 3 hours of battery life you speak of on windows on Arm devices, it's much longer. I do appreciate how thin it is. I've seen devices this thin, with Arm chips in them. Use an Arm chip, solve the problem. Need an OS that can handle multiple screen? Win 11, solves the problem. Need an OS that can run win32 apps? Win11, solves the problem. Stop trying to reinvent the wheel.
  • My key thing here is this. Ok, a foldable android device with 12L, from Microsoft is what you posit is a good idea. The next question, and most important, becomes this. Why does THAT need to be from Microsoft? Why does Microsoft need to spend the R&D, and money, on an ANDROID tablet, to sell it. When something like that can come from Samsung, or some other Android maker, and Microsoft can simply offer their services on that device? It may not FOLD, but Samsung has a Galaxy Tab, with a form factor that 12L was ostensibly made FOR. It has everything you want other than the fact it isn't foldable. I've seen similar devices from a bevy of makers, like Oppo, that are like Neo. Why not just buy those, and run Microsoft services on them, rather than expect that MS invest time and resources into yet another one like them. At least with the Duo. it made sense because the Duo is not trying to be a tablet. It's companion device (like a smartphone). Windows Phone doesn't exist anymore, Windows 11 isn't good for a phone, so this works great, because you can introduce a Microsoft ecosystem to the phone, much better than you can with a tablet. Once you start getting into 10-12 inches or bigger, people want to be more productive, and bar none, Win 11 is more productive than Android. I'm pretty sure this is why the Neo and Duo were not both Android to begin with
  • I finally came to the conclusion that Microsoft is a company without direction in the consumer space. It isn't worth my time anymore to hope that Microsoft cares about consumers. (Consumers = business people who are off duty.) I once really cared. I once really desired to be all in on Microsoft. I drooled over the Neo. Coveted the Duo. Lamented the loss of Windows Mobile. Was awed by Hololens. Today, I just don't care anymore. Put Linux on the Neo for all I care. It's going to flop no matter what they do because Microsoft doesn't care about the experience of their off-duty customers. I broke up with Microsoft and I'm moving on.
  • Everything you said are my thoughts, 5 years ago. The reality is, MS no longer cares about consumers because consumers never did care about MS. Microsoft is doing JUST FINE, with zero consumer products. So is Oracle. So is IBM. No company can be all things to all people. MS has no consumer products. Apple has no business products. McDonalds does not sell prime rib. Ford does not sell motorcycles. Oracle does not have a music streaming service. Why would ANY of these companies blunder into these markets? The answer - of course - is that you concentrate on your strengths. THAT is how successful companies remain successful. Not by wandering into markets that they have no clue about AND where there are already well-established players. Whine all you want about Satya Nadella killing Windows phones (and everything else). Nadella is the best CEO Microsoft has ever had. For proof, just look at MS market valuation and stock price. That is all that matters.
  • I agree with some of what you're saying and definitely feel your frustration. To say that MSFT doesn't care about consumers is a bit of a reach. I think the question is who much do they care? For example, why did they create a Teams for Consumers if they didn't care about consumers? The bigger question is why didn't they put any real effort behind it? Xbox is part of Microsoft and that is pretty much all consumer based. I think there is a question what is the overall ethos and how is that being related across the spectrum of departments that make up MSFT. Why did Surface succeed while other projects failed? I think MSFT will always be Enterprise leaning, but there is still surface area (pun intended) for innovation in the consumer space as well. I really think they are moving in the right direction with Duo 2, the question is how dedicated will they be to stay in that direction?
  • No! Microsoft should just release a single screen surface phone with the surface design, of course, android in it. This will be a huge success ! Many people use Surface go / surface pro . We need the real Surface phone !!
  • If they want to be another Android manufacturer, sell Android hardware, this makes sense. Just having these gimmicky devices isn’t doing them much good. A classic slab could give them some Android cred and experience.
  • IMO There is no place for Surface neo in the market. It doesn't matter whether they use Android or Windows 11, the concept is inherently flawed so there is no point in investing in dual screen pc of that size. It's too small as both a tablet and a laptop to be taken seriously. Only usp of it is book mode use cases where you need to run two apps side by side all the time. It's better to invest in foldables with more advanced software based dual screen implementation as an optional mode within os instead of being a permanent identity of a device.
  • I mostly agree with this stance even if I find the design intriguing. I'm not sure Windows or Android would be great on it (although, at this point, Android would be better than Windows). I do think the concept of a Surface Pro that just folds in half is, long term, more likely.
  • Windows 11 doesn't work well as a tablet OS. I tried typing this comment using the virtual keyboard on a Surface Pro X but I gave up and used the type cover instead. Large tablets aren't very useful without a keyboard attachment because typing on a large glass surface is terrible. Windows 11 is usable on a smaller tablet like the Surface Go in portrait orientation, where thumb typing feels closer to a smartphone experience. I'm not sure where the Surface Neo lies: between the Surface Go and Pro, being too big for tablet-only use while being too small for typical laptop duty.
  • I find typing directly on touch keyboards to be slow and error-prone compared to a physical keyboard, but swiping gets much closer to physical keyboard speed on a touchscreen. A bigger touch area means more distance to travel, so it's physically a bit slower, but it also means easier to get the right swipe points, so fewer errors, which I find to be a slight net win in terms of speed. I could really embrace using a Neo with a touchscreen keyboard designed around swiping for input. You'd still need direct touch-typing for things you can't swipe, like passwords and email addresses, but those are rare enough that would be fine.
  • I had very high hopes for the Neo, but I now think it makes sense to just leave it where it is now, dead.
    Since the Neo didn't come, I had to look at alternatives for my on the go work needs and I found the Surface Go to be a very capable computing device for someone who lives within O365.
    I've kept my Laptop Studio at home now for over 2 month of traveling Internationally and domestically. The combination of Duo and Go works really well.
    I think MSFT should put their focus on those two devices to further improve them. They are, at least for me, the perfect combination for work on the go.
    The Neo was a nice concept, but I am no longer sure it really serves a purpose.
  • Interesting points, appreciate the feedback on your experience. Surface Go is about a generation behind from being really great. It's good now, but just needs a bit more CPU power to be really amazing.
  • It needs an M1.
  • pretty much this
  • Put a Qualcomm 8cx Gen 3 in there or a cut-down 7cx version with LTE. For me, rehashed Skylakes were always a stopgap measure until Windows on ARM gained more traction and Microsoft could switch the Go to an ARM chip.
  • I agree on the CPU. It could be a bit snappier, although I found it OK for what I do (Outlook, Teams, Browser). Battery life could be better (I'm using the LTE model with the i3 chip) too, but it's not bad overall.
    I looked at the ProX as well, but since I have one legacy app I need to have, ARM just doesn't work for me.
    I also found that the Go is the perfect size to use on a plane in economy.
    I believe a Go with a little more CPU power and better battery life, combined with a more touch optimized Windows 11 (Windows 11 for touch is OK, but could be much better) could seriously challenge iPad for the professional crowd much better than a Neo could have.
    I came to really rely on that tablet and I think MSFT has something going there with the Go line if they refine the experience.
  • On the Windows 11 with touch front, it is getting better, but you have to be running DEV builds to know that. I have that running on a Surface Go 3, i3 with LTE, and it can be reasonably good in 'tablet mode'. One thing that needs to change is that the hardware needs to recognize 'tablet mode' better. Ripping the keyboard off certainly triggers it, but just folding it back is inconsistent. They need to put back some of the user control for when the device goes into and out of tablet mode, both user selectable and automatically, they ripped out of Win 7, and haven't put in Win 11.
  • I think they "hold back" the Surface Go just to keep the price down. There should be a "Surface Go Elite" where price is not a constraint, but the form factor is the same. I think there are a lot of people that would pay more for a more powerful Surface Go. A Surface Go with the new 12th gen Intel mobile chips would be amazing.
  • Great point. I love that idea. Does anyone make a powerful tiny computer? I can't think of one. I suppose part of that is practical: a smaller system means less room for cooling, which in turn means all else being equal, a smaller system can't be as powerful as a larger one. Still, if the goal is ultimate portability, and you're willing to spend $2k+, that's a niche that a high-end Surface Go could fill.
  • It's also a matter of battery life. The Go isn't stellar in the first place. Upping the power is going to hurt that even more. The additional stuff you would need to put in for the thermal aspect, is going to eat into physical battery space as well. Outside of going ARM, as in Apple M1 ARM, they are probably squeezing as much performance out of the little guy as they can.
  • That's a really good point. While the Duo and Neo look cool together, from a usability standpoint I'm not sure if users would want TWO foldable devices, I think it's really up to user preference on the size, but I think typically they'd want one and then a regular single screen device as the other (i.e. Duo + Go, or Neo + standard phone). But having the options would be great, but I know from a business side it's not always cost-effective.
  • I fully agree. I think I'm about at a 50/50 split on usage between my Duo and my Go when traveling. Quick emails and Teams chats are done on the Duo, more intricate emails, work in Planner, presentations, word docs happen on the Go.
    That's why I think Android on a Neo wouldn't cut it. I need to have a Windows machine with me.
    With Phone Link, the work experience has gotten really good.
    The Neo would occupy an in between space im not sure needs a separate device. It's too large to replace the Duo, but too small (in laptop mode) for real work.
  • No. There's no real need for this device if it's just going to be a larger Duo. Also comparing it to Android tablets, it's not such a great thing.
    It was going to be its own thing, and I still think it would need to have custom software for it to be good. A lot of problems arise towards this goal, but just making a tablet with Android is not going to wow anyone
  • Nah, keep Windows on it. Wasn't one of the main points of the device to bring more devs into the Windows ecosystem to build apps, which in turn would help bring more mobile apps into the Windows ecosystem so they can get back into the mobile game? With Android apps in Windows, there's no reason to have Android on the device anymore, but rather improve the software side so that Android apps work seamlessly in Windows and give Win32 apps better dual screen and experiences if they're not going to push UWP harder.
  • "Wasn't one of the main points of the device to bring more devs into the Windows ecosystem to build apps, which in turn would help bring more mobile apps into the Windows ecosystem so they can get back into the mobile game?" This cause has been long lost
  • I think the idea that devs would flock to optimize Windows app for one single super expensive niche device when they wouldn't do it for millions of Windows Phones is a bit rich, tbh.
  • I didn't mean just for Neo. But from my understanding when I used to work at one of their sales partners back in the day, a lot of key people at MS didn't even know Neo existed when it was announced, so it was a surprise to them as well during that (amazing) announcement event. And one of the various pitches was that Neo was supposed to come with Windows 10X and Duo with Android. By offering a first-party Surface-branded Android device alongside a similar looking device in the same brand family with Windows, it would help entice Android devs to dip their feet into the Surface + Windows ecosystem since customers who would buy a Duo (Android) would typically have another larger Surface/Windows device for full productivity, so those Android devs would want those Duo users to have that cross-device integration with their other Windows/Surface devices, just like Apple has that cross-device features within their own locked-in ecosystem, but Microsoft's would be even bigger since it would be open and includes Android + other Windows OEMs. That obviously doesn't seem to be plan anymore with 10X being canned, but who knows it might still be in the works with 11 behind closed doors.
  • While I like the theme and the strategy has a solid logic to it, I don't think the Duo is anywhere close to mainstream enough to have any real impact on developers. Think of developers, in general, as driven by what provides the best return on their time investment, which means the least work for the most market share gain. If they can add support for Duo or add a new feature that extends their competitive reach among the legions of existing Android users, they'll generally choose the latter. You may find an occasional dev who's also a Duo fan and does the work out a personal interest, but those are rare and not enough to really drive the market.
  • I don't know what Microsoft are planning, but the fact that 40 years they miserably fail to create a modern operating system different than Windows with tons of legacy bloated code is just sad. I am on MS side, but will always appreciate how in 10 years Apple spinned off OSX into iOS, iPadOS, tvOS, WatchOS, and probably mixed realityOS of some kind, providing modern and pleasant experience for the device they are creating. And I'm calling it, the precise day Apple introduce Final Cut Pro and Logic Pro full featured versions developed exclusively for iPadOS + multi monitor support this will be the end of Windows once and for all. Mark my words
  • Agreed until the last point. Microsoft has tried loads of times to develop a modern operating system and none worked out. Few create media on Windows so your ascertion an iPad running Final Cut Pro will kill Windows is an odd one. Hell few people even use MacBooks. Despite Apple clearly have far more capable PCs to Windows now it's done nothing for the MacBook market share. MacOS remains a niche operating system. Its still Windows people and businesses largely want. Businesses still buy Windows laptops. None of which are using Final Cut Pro or Logic Pro. Microsoft won the desktop space a long time ago and Apple knows this, stopped competing years ago. M1 Macs are for Apple fans in the main. Likewise Apple won the mobile space. I don't mean in numbers but in the ecosystem they developed.
  • "Hell few people even use MacBooks."
    Only reason is and always has been that MacBooks (and Apple stuff) are expensive for majority of people and they can opt out for a cheap plastic alternative. If those same people had the money to spare they would have never bought plastic stuff, but premium. This affects their market share, which has never been their top priority anyways as they make the most money compared to every competitor out there (maybe even summed up). So I don't get your point here "MacOS remains a niche operating system."
    MacOS remains as capable and versatile operating system as Windows and always has been (some will argue even more). If by niche you mean again with less market share, I guess that has to do something with the expensive hardware that it goes with exclusively (and because of that exclusivity reaps benefits that Surface + Windows even can't (because MS are faithful not "to hurt" their OEM partners)) "Microsoft won the desktop space a long time ago and Apple knows this, stopped competing years ago. M1 Macs are for Apple fans in the main."
    True but the World doesn't care for desktop as it used to and Apple also knows this and they have already planted the seed for the future and reaping the benefits. Problem is MS doesn't. Mobile/Desktop line is blurred exactly because of iPad (and not because of Surface, come on). iPadOS is the modern OS for new experiences that will get better until there is no line. While Windows is just old pig with lipstick, wrapped in a magnesium Surface body with no exclusivity at all Rubino or someone else might come after me saying I'm an Apple troll/fanboy, but problem with fan sites like WC that follows MS (which judging by every product they have except Xbox is that they are a business enabling-first company and consumer-second) is that they write only about consumer stuff from MS. Heck Zac even says it in the Podcast that he is not interested in covering business stuff... Have you ever seen such amount of articles about Azure, Windows Server, GitHub, VS Code etc.? And yet expectations is not to compare with arguably the king of consumer goods - Apple. And when you naturally do, they hate?!?!
  • Market share is pretty much the key attribute in determine if something is "niche." Anything else is just personal preference. Mac OS is a small niche OS by any rational definition. I used to prefer Apple over PC (and I really respect Apple's foresight to move Apple from their own home-built OS 9 sinking ship to a Unix-based OS X, though it was a natural extension of Steve Jobs' Unix-based computer company, NeXT, which Apple acquired primarily to get Jobs back). My first few computers were Apples. But since about Windows 95, certainly since Windows 2000/XP, Apple has just not provided the capabilities we have in Windows in as efficient a UX as we get with Windows. I find the Mac UI frustrating. It's very nice to look at, but slow and clumsy to get around by keyboard or mouse. I don't just prefer Windows because of the larger app selection, but because Windows is a much more efficient OS to use. You also mentioned price. That matters. Whether by choice or engineering shortcomings, Apple is not able to offer systems at price points that could allow them to break out of their niche status. Personally, I'd pay more for a Windows system than a comparable Mac system, but for the mass market, Apple is limited not just by its functional problems, but also by price.
  • Very well stated. The one aspect that I would add that everyone is missing is marketing. Apple owns that space. The apple logo was considered new, innovative, hip, and cool. It was seen on billboards, magazines, all the latest movies, and anywhere else you could post an advertisement. The vast majority of Apple users I know don't even use their devices to their full potential. They are just conditioned to buy them. Apple has balanced the line between innovation and arrogance pretty well. The irony is they are starting to act like Microsoft did 20 years ago.
  • Interesting article as always Daniel. On paper it makes sense but in reality the execution would be poor. Android is easily the best phone operating system but its poor even on 8" tablets and just gets poorer as the screen gets bigger. Don't get me wrong I've owned Android tablets and have enjoyed them, but Microsoft will want a better experience than phone apps forced on to larger displays than Android offers. None of Facebook's incredibly popular suite of apps work as well as they should on tablets for instance, some not at all. We kind of already know what Android will be like on a Neo. Just look at the Galaxy Tab and even Samsung knows Android is poor so push you to Dex. Microsoft isn't going to be designing Dex offering. Windows 10X was interesting because it was more like ChromeOS. A mobile first desktop operating. No matter how hard Samsung forces Android to be this, its limitations always stand out a mile on their otherwise excellent Galaxy Tabs. Despite now copying Surface Pros they just can't be used as laptop replacements for most people. Microsoft positioned as Neo doing this.
  • Don't put android on more things!!
    Duo was one mistake and we don't need more.
    Give users a windows hendheld device and bring cortana back.
  • I mean, sure, that's what we all want here. No controversy. But the reality is, Microsoft apparently can't pull off a new mobile OS, whether it's Windows Mobile, Windows Phone OS, Windows 10 Mobile, or Windows 10X. So while wanting something is fine and dandy, I think we have to face the reality that Microsoft is not capable of delivering what we really want. So, what's the best next option?
  • What MSFT should focus on is how to get iOs and or Android apps work in windows. (Not bring iOs and Android apps to window) but get developers with minimal clicks bring these apps to Windows.
    Microsoft need a way to let developers write for iOs and Android that works in windows.
    I think that is what will work.
  • iOS is a non-starter as Apple won't cooperate and let that happen. As far as getting Android apps to run on Windows, you need an emulation layer. You can't just get code written for ARM smartphones based on Android to run directly in x86 environments. That's not how that works. All MS can do is lower the barrier/make it feel more natural as much as possible.
  • I don’t get what the issue is with Apple and Microsoft not playing nice (besides the obvious). Early on you could transfer pictures at least through the Your Phone app and Dell has the Mobile Connect app that has feature parity with Phone Link for Android. Even HP had a similar companion app a few years ago. They’re eating too much red meat in California.
  • For Apple, the reasoning is simple: There is no reason to cooperate. They want people with iPhones to buy a Mac and you do that by offering the best experience possible and not giving an inch to PC. I'm kind of shocked Apple has a Windows iTunes app, tbh.
  • Answer to the question is NO!
    But why microsoft can't pull off new mobile OS? Windows phone has been still the best mobile OS I have used, iOS is ok too but android is total 🐎💩
  • WP was complete trash, even Microsoft admitted they put little effort into it. You might as well been using a flip phone. Microsoft could create a mobile OS, but they need to start from scratch, put full effort in, and it will still fail since they are 15 years behind now. It is too late. They just have to give up and find other products.
  • Does there need to be a next best option? Does MS need to sell another hardware form factor with someone else's OS on it? Not even sure I get the point of DUO, from a MS business POV. I don't imagine they are making a killing selling DUOs. I don't imagine the DUO's existence is helping MS services in any measurable way. Making a NEO, as neat as it seems, likely won't make MS any money if they put Android on it. If it prompts other OEMs to copy it, like Surface did (sort of), they would surely put Android on it as well. That doesn't help MS.
  • “I don't imagine they are making a killing selling DUOs.” Since the Duos aren’t selling, they aren’t making any money at all. MS sold about 40,000 Duo 1s, the vast majority of those at fire sale prices of around $600 or less. Because $1,500 was and remains absurd. No numbers yet on the Duo 2, but I suspect it is not much better.
  • Completely agree, stop putting Android everywhere and stop making these non-sense articles...
  • I don't think putting Android on it is really the best move. While we have Android 12L, Android tablets still kind of suck and until they're at a good point I think putting another Android tablet out there would be a waste of effort.
  • I think it works fine for the Duo series, because it's a multitasking device/phone. The Neo isn't a device I would want android for, considering the price they will ask for it, and many would only use it as a secondary device. Not convinced it would be a good idea for that size device.
  • The premium pricing would certainly be a challenge when comparing it other Android tablets.
  • Too big for Android, too small for Windows. Just drop the whole project tbh
  • Those statements are true today. But in the long-term, I hope that MS anticipates more portable PC's, meaning getting Windows to work on small devices the size of the Neo should be on their roadmap, even if it's not possible in 2022. To the extent they have any interests in returning to a mobile OS, way, way down the road, the Neo also serves as an excellent stepping stone.
  • Yup, there is a certain reality to Neo in that it doesn't fit with either OS.
  • Late to post on this, but wanted to throw in my 2 cents: I do not think Microsoft should put Android on the Neo and sell it. I think it would be strategically dangerous for MS. While smaller than a PC, the Neo is still intended primarily as a productivity device, not a phone. As such, the Surface Go, Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Fold, and various other small form-factor Windows OEM systems are the closest competitive devices (I know they're not competing for exactly the same users as NEO, but they're still the closest existing devices). Building something that makes Android more attractive on those larger devices hurts Microsoft's OEM sales and weakens the MS ecosystem. I don't see any upside and plenty of downside to MS in doing this. Better would be to continue to improve the tablet usability of Windows 11. I agree that it's not great for such a small device today, but using that as an engineering target: "Make Windows work well on the NEO," is a more valuable Mission Statement for Panay's team. It may take them another 2-3 years, folding in more from Windows 10x and C-Shell, but during that time we'll also see more potent hardware at that size. That means an improving ability to run Android apps on Windows, which would be the real value of shipping Neo with Android anyway. This way they get the benefits to users without shooting themselves in the foot.
  • Double-posted by accident. Sorry.
  • One other comment and question on a device like the Neo: I find that swiping is much, much, much faster for me than typing on touch keyboard. In fact, swiping support is what finally allowed me to give up the physical keyboards on phones. Swiping for me is almost (not quite) as fast as typing on a great mechanical keyboard. I don't have any data on this, but from my observations, must users appear to type rather than swipe on a touchscreen keyboard. Not sure if that's due to a lack of exposure, or if most people genuinely don't like swiping. If there are a lot of us who do prefer swiping, I wonder if there's an opportunity to put more work into improving swiping support, making that inherent to UI to make a touch keyboard actually effective on a small foldable PC. For example, audio feedback where it says the word it just added to help catch mistakes, AI-based context selection for choosing the right word when more than one could fit based on the swipe, etc.
  • Surface Neo with Windows: Instant Buy Surface Neo with Android: Not interested in the least
  • They might want to, so as to take advantage of all the efforts expended on the Duo.
  • My first comment here... So, I think MSFT should launch Neo with Android. I know it could be dangerous but, it could be an iPad and Galaxy Tab killer. Two screens can do more than only one. I would buy one. It can be so good to students and people that want some mobility. My thoughts: RAM: 8, 12 and 16GB; Storage: 256, 512GB, 1 and 2TB(possibly an Ultimate Edition); Processor: Snapdragon 8 Gen 1. MSFT have the experience with Duo to enhance and improve Neo(with Android). So, if Windows Central is talking about it, I think it could be something to watch.
  • MSFT could just put Android on it and do like Samsung does with there phones and tablets.
    Samsung allows you to make phone calls and send texts like phone link does, and they can link the Neo to Duo just like Samsung does that would be awesome.
    My Wife can finally use her Note 20 with her Tab S8+ to make calls with AT&T finally added that feature.