This sounds promising.
http://m.windowscentral.com/forthcoming-surface-pro-3-patch-prevents-accidental-wake-sleep-improves-wi-fi
http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/surface/forum/surfpro3-surfhardware/upcoming-fixes-for-surface-pro-3-announced-on/ea057dd8-1135-41a8-b74e-30f6e04b2424
Oh dear.
This doesn't sound promising to me. This sounds like Microsoft not being able to use their experience and judgement to resolve the issue properly, so they've resorted to "if the customer wants it, that's what we'll give them".
Personally, I don't want my device to prefer 5Ghz just because it's there (and gives the placebo effect of showing a higher link speed) -
I want it to choose the best band to use that will give me the best throughput.
What qualifies the "customers" in question to make product development decisions? I have seen a LOT of people complaining about "speed" when they're looking at link speed. I know many also are better informed and have conducted more reasonable tests of
throughput, but still, who are Microsoft trying to appease here, the experts who should know better, or the less well informed?
Come on Microsoft, make some accurate and honest statements about what's happening here, please don't just pander to customers by saying "we're giving you what you wanted". Give me some technical details and rationale for why my £1,100 device still has
issues. If it's because you failed and made poor hardware design decisions - just tell me - I'll respect you for it and move on! If it's software/firmware, be more descriptive in the update release notes.
FYI: Before the most recent update, my actual throughput on the SP3 was the same whether I was on 2.4Ghz-n, 5Ghz-n or ac, with each having massively different link speeds, (although ac throughput was marginally better). Still bad, but consistent.