This will be long, sorry!
And that's a good point, this might be the reason that MS pivoted from the Surface 3/Pro 3 configuration to the Surface Pro 4/Book arrangement. The Surface 3 was never refreshed, and is not even listed with the lineup any longer (still on the site though, haha).
I would say that it could be worth looking at, especially as you said if there was an option to run android (a la Yoga Book), it could give us an opportunity to reach a potentially more mainstream audience. However these specs are not very different than the m3 version of the the V, I think the OP was mainly looking at the dimensions/weight for a smaller tablet.
To be fair, she was also saying avoid plastic, use the same aluminum body:
And to the OP's follow-up comments, I think you can disregard my comments on the processor, as her point was more about form-factor than compute power. So on that side of things, the 9" factor would be more important, and would give you the weight difference she's looking at. I also tend to think thickness is secondary to battery life.
Yeah, realized that Kaby Lake was what they were skipping Atoms for, that's my mistake.
Agreed, haha, would never want a netbook-grade pentium or a celeron in anything! (Or any grade of them, really , I am biased against Pentiums and Celerons, in case you can't tell). IMHO I can't understand why that architecture exists, as it seems more inefficient than scaling up the atom processors. Looking at the top refreshed atom vs pentium the atom, at 2W TDP sometimes benches higher than the 6.5W pentium and at most was ~20% slower (in graphics, actually), which makes no sense vs a "higher grade" of processor. Seems like a poor choice to not just scale up that atom processor for more power, though I don't truly know the technology of the different architectures (Like I know that AMD's Carizzo wasn't initially scaled up for desktop APU's because it was so efficiency-optimized that it didn't actually scale well, haha)