Original post:
http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/hiner/?p=5651
Discussion on:
View:
Show:
Great exposition on the lack of vision seen at Microsoft, Jason. I couldn't agree more. It's a shame because, as I usually say after a bout of MS-bashing, their massive established market gives them the leverage to pull off something truly groundbreaking if they'd only spend their time and resources on innovating their products, instead of simply innovating their licence agreements and return on investor capital.
They've hinted at having an inkling of what people want with moves such as linking between WP7 and the XBox Live gaming accounts. It's a great example of convergence and the things that become possible when the same company supplies your game console and your smartphone. There have to be a ton more ways to innovate in that arena - and make a ton of money doing so, deservedly. The iPhone is one of the greatest gaming platforms in the world targeted towards a 4" screen - imagine if it was linked to an established gaming console, the way Nintendo sometimes link between games on their console and handheld devices? There's an opportunity to add massive depth to the whole experience by recognising the different aspects these two devices play in the average gamer's life.
Microsoft are uniquely positioned to take advantage of that paradigm, and should be seizing upon it with both hands. Historically they've had a practice of waiting to see what their market wants, and supplying a (usually not very good) solution 1-2 years down the line. Contrast this with Apple, who lead the technology market by the nose, telling their customers in no uncertain terms what they want (and exactly how they're allowed to use it!). MS could certainly learn a thing or two there, by which I mean Don'ts as well as Do's...
The success of Android in the smartphone market is a warning to both Apple and MS. Both companies have a history of locking down their market through aggressive licencing and a near-complete lack of interoperability (so-called 'Windows' drivers; utter dependence on iTunes in order to use an mp3 player or smartphone...?). With the advent of an open software platform backed by extremely strong hardware - HTC, Motorola, Samsung - both Redmond and Cupertino need to wake up to the fact that they will have to fight for their incumbent dominance in their respective markets in the future. And you can't do that with a prison warden-like attitude to your customers, or crappy compatibility. It's going to take actual, sustained innovation; well thought-out and executed product design; and genuine value for the customer dollar. Whoever can do that deserves market dominance, and is welcome to my hard-earned money.
They've hinted at having an inkling of what people want with moves such as linking between WP7 and the XBox Live gaming accounts. It's a great example of convergence and the things that become possible when the same company supplies your game console and your smartphone. There have to be a ton more ways to innovate in that arena - and make a ton of money doing so, deservedly. The iPhone is one of the greatest gaming platforms in the world targeted towards a 4" screen - imagine if it was linked to an established gaming console, the way Nintendo sometimes link between games on their console and handheld devices? There's an opportunity to add massive depth to the whole experience by recognising the different aspects these two devices play in the average gamer's life.
Microsoft are uniquely positioned to take advantage of that paradigm, and should be seizing upon it with both hands. Historically they've had a practice of waiting to see what their market wants, and supplying a (usually not very good) solution 1-2 years down the line. Contrast this with Apple, who lead the technology market by the nose, telling their customers in no uncertain terms what they want (and exactly how they're allowed to use it!). MS could certainly learn a thing or two there, by which I mean Don'ts as well as Do's...
The success of Android in the smartphone market is a warning to both Apple and MS. Both companies have a history of locking down their market through aggressive licencing and a near-complete lack of interoperability (so-called 'Windows' drivers; utter dependence on iTunes in order to use an mp3 player or smartphone...?). With the advent of an open software platform backed by extremely strong hardware - HTC, Motorola, Samsung - both Redmond and Cupertino need to wake up to the fact that they will have to fight for their incumbent dominance in their respective markets in the future. And you can't do that with a prison warden-like attitude to your customers, or crappy compatibility. It's going to take actual, sustained innovation; well thought-out and executed product design; and genuine value for the customer dollar. Whoever can do that deserves market dominance, and is welcome to my hard-earned money.
Even though the headline is about the "tablet strategy", the article itself really hits home on what's wrong in Redmond. No tech company is ever going to be a "mature public company trying to maximize its profits". In this arena, "mature" really does mean dead and "maximizing profits" requires being if not first with new things, the best with "almost" new things.
I can't fault Gates for wanting to do something with his life - he's certainly earned the right to do so - but the potential that is being ignored is staggering. I say "ignored" because to squander it, you'd have to be trying to do something. Microsoft doesn't seem to be trying to do anything run around and screw itself into the ground.
I can't fault Gates for wanting to do something with his life - he's certainly earned the right to do so - but the potential that is being ignored is staggering. I say "ignored" because to squander it, you'd have to be trying to do something. Microsoft doesn't seem to be trying to do anything run around and screw itself into the ground.
The last decade has seen little if anything from Microsoft that was anything but reactionary. A complete failure to innovate leaves the company simply running around trying to stick its fingers in as many pies as possible. The belief that simply having a Microsoft product in each technological arena is good enough, betrays the lack of vision in Redmond today.
Now it's other companies who innovate, such as Apple (the iPod, the iPhone, the iPad, all generating entire markets of their own, despite not being original at the time they were developed), or the Android OS, the most interesting software development in the last half decade, if only because it's both open *and* mainstream.
With the smartphone revolution, we have a truly open playing field with several big players - Palm, Symbian, RIM, Apple, Android - along with MS and the most amazing thing of all is that all of the software and/or hardware developers are in a market where it's finally possible to compete on merit! This is the last thing Microsoft ever wanted because the truth all along has been that they've sat and watched the world go by rather than innovate. Anything new that came along was easy enough to buy out or kill.
The problem I've always had with this attitude is that it damages the entire computing industry. I have nothing against a company making money: that is its legal mandate and without this it ceases to exist. *How* it makes money though, is either a benefit or a detriment to the ecosystem in which it resides, and a company that kills any innovation in order to either bring it into their stable or simply to remove competition to their product, is lowering the whole industry to their level and sluggish pace of development. This benefits no one but Microsoft. How bad would the global spam levels today be if the world's most prevalent computing platform hadn't automatically foisted an insecure web browser on its users? That's just one example of a company strongarming OEMs and the public to get its way and hurting a whole industry in the process. And they don't even make money on the software. That's the biggest joke of all.
Now it's other companies who innovate, such as Apple (the iPod, the iPhone, the iPad, all generating entire markets of their own, despite not being original at the time they were developed), or the Android OS, the most interesting software development in the last half decade, if only because it's both open *and* mainstream.
With the smartphone revolution, we have a truly open playing field with several big players - Palm, Symbian, RIM, Apple, Android - along with MS and the most amazing thing of all is that all of the software and/or hardware developers are in a market where it's finally possible to compete on merit! This is the last thing Microsoft ever wanted because the truth all along has been that they've sat and watched the world go by rather than innovate. Anything new that came along was easy enough to buy out or kill.
The problem I've always had with this attitude is that it damages the entire computing industry. I have nothing against a company making money: that is its legal mandate and without this it ceases to exist. *How* it makes money though, is either a benefit or a detriment to the ecosystem in which it resides, and a company that kills any innovation in order to either bring it into their stable or simply to remove competition to their product, is lowering the whole industry to their level and sluggish pace of development. This benefits no one but Microsoft. How bad would the global spam levels today be if the world's most prevalent computing platform hadn't automatically foisted an insecure web browser on its users? That's just one example of a company strongarming OEMs and the public to get its way and hurting a whole industry in the process. And they don't even make money on the software. That's the biggest joke of all.
Absolutely the next generation of zero maintenanace consumer pcs will be X Box like and MS has the capability to deliver such a concept. But a legacy unimaginative boss like Ballmer will never realise that and be prepared to canibalise his past revenues to create a new future with such a grand strategy, as I have written elshewhere in this thread, he is the death of Microsoft.
I certainly can't argue the premise of your article, but I think the suggestions for correcting it are wrong:
1) I think that Microsoft can -- and should -- pursue a two-pronged strategy for tablets. A WP7-based "Tablet for Everyone" system, with the ability to run Flash, USB ports to hook up to conventional peripherals and SDHC slot for convenient extra internal storage and SneakerNet connectivity at a $500-600 price point would hit the iPad market right where it lives.
A "Tablet Pro" solution with Windows 7 Home Premium, additional battery capacity, firmware-upgradable embedded OS on a chip, hot-swappable 2.5" hard disk/SSD drive bay for applications and files, and all of the connectivity associated with the consumer tablet would take the high ground that nobody's claimed yet. This tablet could be thicker, heavier and sturdier for business use. Shape the battery as a hump on one of the short edges of the tablet to provide a convenient handle, provide a compartment for storing a "picking stylus" to use for forms and checklists and a "down-side" rotation feature for the screen to accommodate left- and right-handed users and price this system, well-equipped, at a $1000-1200 price point. If this sounds like an overgrown UPS or FedEx handheld system, you're getting the right idea.
2) Forget about putting Ballmer in a black turtleneck and blue jeans and turning him into Chief Demonstration Officer. That act's already been done. Instead, develop a team of business unit heads with real autonomy, adequately funded to do their jobs and put them on the front line. Introduce a collaborative mindset that looks at interaction between those business units as cross-pollination instead of poaching. Team goals that equal team success, rather than managing through monolithic lethargy.
3) Take Apple's vertical hardware and software development model and turn it against them. Rather than engineer parts of the solution and pray that some partner executes the solution the way you like; engineer the entire solution, build a proof-of-concept model and then license it to a couple of manufacturers on a non-exclusive basis. Those licensees gain rights to first-mover advantage, then soon after open up manufacturing licensing to anyone who wants to use the solution and extend its capabilities. That's essentially how Microsoft outflanked IBM and Apple 25-30 years ago, and that's how Microsoft can be a successful leader and innovator once again.
4) Get those business units the Hell off the West Coast. Engineers are innovators. The "high-tech industry" is locked into stifling orthodoxy and conformity. It's hard to conceive and execute innovative solutions inside of Silicon Valley -- or metro Seattle -- when you're surrounded by a community of sycophants and second-guessers dismiss solutions before they're executed because someone else has already been successful at it before you or because someone else hasn't. Not that there aren't lessons to be learned from history, but it's hard to break the mold when you're surrounded by pundits determined to push you into one.
By the way, Microsoft, if you're out there reading this, I'm available for consulting and service contract under mutually agreeable terms ...
1) I think that Microsoft can -- and should -- pursue a two-pronged strategy for tablets. A WP7-based "Tablet for Everyone" system, with the ability to run Flash, USB ports to hook up to conventional peripherals and SDHC slot for convenient extra internal storage and SneakerNet connectivity at a $500-600 price point would hit the iPad market right where it lives.
A "Tablet Pro" solution with Windows 7 Home Premium, additional battery capacity, firmware-upgradable embedded OS on a chip, hot-swappable 2.5" hard disk/SSD drive bay for applications and files, and all of the connectivity associated with the consumer tablet would take the high ground that nobody's claimed yet. This tablet could be thicker, heavier and sturdier for business use. Shape the battery as a hump on one of the short edges of the tablet to provide a convenient handle, provide a compartment for storing a "picking stylus" to use for forms and checklists and a "down-side" rotation feature for the screen to accommodate left- and right-handed users and price this system, well-equipped, at a $1000-1200 price point. If this sounds like an overgrown UPS or FedEx handheld system, you're getting the right idea.
2) Forget about putting Ballmer in a black turtleneck and blue jeans and turning him into Chief Demonstration Officer. That act's already been done. Instead, develop a team of business unit heads with real autonomy, adequately funded to do their jobs and put them on the front line. Introduce a collaborative mindset that looks at interaction between those business units as cross-pollination instead of poaching. Team goals that equal team success, rather than managing through monolithic lethargy.
3) Take Apple's vertical hardware and software development model and turn it against them. Rather than engineer parts of the solution and pray that some partner executes the solution the way you like; engineer the entire solution, build a proof-of-concept model and then license it to a couple of manufacturers on a non-exclusive basis. Those licensees gain rights to first-mover advantage, then soon after open up manufacturing licensing to anyone who wants to use the solution and extend its capabilities. That's essentially how Microsoft outflanked IBM and Apple 25-30 years ago, and that's how Microsoft can be a successful leader and innovator once again.
4) Get those business units the Hell off the West Coast. Engineers are innovators. The "high-tech industry" is locked into stifling orthodoxy and conformity. It's hard to conceive and execute innovative solutions inside of Silicon Valley -- or metro Seattle -- when you're surrounded by a community of sycophants and second-guessers dismiss solutions before they're executed because someone else has already been successful at it before you or because someone else hasn't. Not that there aren't lessons to be learned from history, but it's hard to break the mold when you're surrounded by pundits determined to push you into one.
By the way, Microsoft, if you're out there reading this, I'm available for consulting and service contract under mutually agreeable terms ...
... engineer the entire solution...
They had better start developing a serious business unit for hardware, then, because MS is a complete failure at hardware and choosing fabrication partners.
I hope you can give them some good advice in this area. Best of luck.
They had better start developing a serious business unit for hardware, then, because MS is a complete failure at hardware and choosing fabrication partners.
I hope you can give them some good advice in this area. Best of luck.
No, seanferd, you've got me wrong here. Microsoft only needs to build it to the prototype stage, then license it out to established manufacturers. Dell is actively looking to get into this space. So are the major Taiwanese and mainland Chinese manufacturers. There's a big enough universe that even Microsoft can find a couple of good partners to kick this program off.
And as for getting a contract from Microsoft? Heck, I've probably got a better chance of winning the lottery. But I do believe I'm offering valid advice that would do the company some good. Whether they give me some business or not, I wish they'd take it to heart.
Of course, if they ARE looking to give me some business ... they can reach me through here ...
And as for getting a contract from Microsoft? Heck, I've probably got a better chance of winning the lottery. But I do believe I'm offering valid advice that would do the company some good. Whether they give me some business or not, I wish they'd take it to heart.
Of course, if they ARE looking to give me some business ... they can reach me through here ...
with their iPhone platform, at least.
No reason at all that Microsoft couldn't do the same thing...
No reason at all that Microsoft couldn't do the same thing...
Microsoft seems to think too small. Their only vision is to take their existing products and make them a little better. They settle for mediocre products rather than producing anything "state-of-the-art". They have the talent and resources to dramatically change both the consumer & business world of technology, but rather than acting like coaches who creates a winning team by creating inovative strategy and demanding performance, their leadership acts more like cheerleaders desperately trying to pump up the fans of a losing team.
MS has a history of trying to freeze the market by announcing an impending product and many times its vapourware.
My own industry, where my company is a world leader, has suffered from this strategy. MS announced three years ago it would compete, but there is still nothing from them on the market. I recall the same scenario on another product 15 years ago and MS never produced a thing to compete.
I've seen similar tactics with other tools. A company will be on the verge of a gamechanging product, and MS will announce an impending competitor. Buyers, nervous that they may pick before competition heats up and lowers cost, delay their decisions. The big splash the innovators expect is diminished, and by the time that people realize MS is not coming to market soon, the innovator has lost momentum.
MS plays hardball.
My own industry, where my company is a world leader, has suffered from this strategy. MS announced three years ago it would compete, but there is still nothing from them on the market. I recall the same scenario on another product 15 years ago and MS never produced a thing to compete.
I've seen similar tactics with other tools. A company will be on the verge of a gamechanging product, and MS will announce an impending competitor. Buyers, nervous that they may pick before competition heats up and lowers cost, delay their decisions. The big splash the innovators expect is diminished, and by the time that people realize MS is not coming to market soon, the innovator has lost momentum.
MS plays hardball.
it hasn't work this time.
And now Microsoft is left standing flat-footed, with no tangible product or viable strategy.
And now Microsoft is left standing flat-footed, with no tangible product or viable strategy.
Because of their past failures, and because MS has to work with a HW company, its easier to pull off with a software only product.
I'm not suggesting they abandoned tablet computing, just that they knew they didn't have a hope of a timely entrance into the market, but they decided to muddy the waters which probably hurt iPad sales, at least for a time. Meanwhile they will retreat and regroup.
Apple's advantage here, of being able to build the HW and the software in house and not rely on another company does pay off in time to market.
MS's advantage is that since virtually every enterprise uses MS software somewhere in their organization, they have some captive customers who must consider anything that MS creates, in order to reduce the complexity/number of vendors.
I'm not suggesting they abandoned tablet computing, just that they knew they didn't have a hope of a timely entrance into the market, but they decided to muddy the waters which probably hurt iPad sales, at least for a time. Meanwhile they will retreat and regroup.
Apple's advantage here, of being able to build the HW and the software in house and not rely on another company does pay off in time to market.
MS's advantage is that since virtually every enterprise uses MS software somewhere in their organization, they have some captive customers who must consider anything that MS creates, in order to reduce the complexity/number of vendors.
Folk
Pehaps this is a case of Me too!
I use windows products at work and have a consisten need for such things. as a group there is an intent to migrate to Win7 once all the programme compatibility issues are resolved - given the number of disparate propgrammes it is a lot of work the ability to use a Tablet PC would be really useful in the work that I do, enabling ease of drafting and mapping programmes
This does not preclude the home use products. I look at what myself and my daughters use at home and it is clearly biased in the Apple type usability - pressure from the girls is for the next laptop to be an apple product. I have an iphone 3s and while there is some clunkyness with the integration with outlook, I have no complaints
I trialled an android phone the other day, and it has extremely limited compatibility with Outlook - you have to have a Gmail account to work it, and migrate your contacts etc to there first. when migrated it works well and is good to use, but interfacing is not intuitive
Winmob 6.4 is likewise not intuitive to interface, but can be crowbarred nto place
In short, will still need and use win products for work, but Apple is the product for the hopme
Pehaps this is a case of Me too!
I use windows products at work and have a consisten need for such things. as a group there is an intent to migrate to Win7 once all the programme compatibility issues are resolved - given the number of disparate propgrammes it is a lot of work the ability to use a Tablet PC would be really useful in the work that I do, enabling ease of drafting and mapping programmes
This does not preclude the home use products. I look at what myself and my daughters use at home and it is clearly biased in the Apple type usability - pressure from the girls is for the next laptop to be an apple product. I have an iphone 3s and while there is some clunkyness with the integration with outlook, I have no complaints
I trialled an android phone the other day, and it has extremely limited compatibility with Outlook - you have to have a Gmail account to work it, and migrate your contacts etc to there first. when migrated it works well and is good to use, but interfacing is not intuitive
Winmob 6.4 is likewise not intuitive to interface, but can be crowbarred nto place
In short, will still need and use win products for work, but Apple is the product for the hopme
In an amazing display of pissing away product leadership, Microsoft had the potential to lead in several categories with the Tablet PC. They had a true Tablet computing device that had good battery life for the time (I could go over 7 hours with a 2003 TC1100-itself a design far ahead of its time, which HP didn't get). They had excellent ebook software for the time (MS Reader). They began writing games and utilities and providing developer support and then stopped both. They couldn't even get the Office group to write their own software to take advantage of the pen.
Gates, whatever you may think of him, had vision and his vision for Tablet computing was far ahead of the times. Too bad he retired at exactly the wrong time to leverage what could have been a phenomenal platform.
Gates, whatever you may think of him, had vision and his vision for Tablet computing was far ahead of the times. Too bad he retired at exactly the wrong time to leverage what could have been a phenomenal platform.
a Chinese company are selling 10" tablet PC's with Windows7 - although a bit pricey
Tablet PC HM-A03-005 with 10 inch touch screen, Windows 7 OS, WiFi, 160GB hardrive, 1GB memory
CODE: HM-A03-005
$543.28
In stock
Tablet PC HM-A03-002 with 10 inch touch screen, Windows 7 OS, 250G harddrive, 1GB memory,Intel Atom N455 1.66GHz CPU
CODE: HM-A03-002
$465.67
http://www.winwinunion.com/index.php?dispatch=categories.view&category_id=239
Tablet PC HM-A03-005 with 10 inch touch screen, Windows 7 OS, WiFi, 160GB hardrive, 1GB memory
CODE: HM-A03-005
$543.28
In stock
Tablet PC HM-A03-002 with 10 inch touch screen, Windows 7 OS, 250G harddrive, 1GB memory,Intel Atom N455 1.66GHz CPU
CODE: HM-A03-002
$465.67
http://www.winwinunion.com/index.php?dispatch=categories.view&category_id=239
Here is another example of a Chinese company selling a Windows7 tablet, I think the same manufacture, but this one is multi-touch...
http://chinagrabber.com/10-2-multi-touch-screen-3g-network-tablet-pc---mini-windows-7-gps-wifi-apad---x9-gps-pc.aspx
Of course when we way pricey, that is compared to Netbook/Laptop. These are still in the iPad price range, with a full OS.
http://chinagrabber.com/10-2-multi-touch-screen-3g-network-tablet-pc---mini-windows-7-gps-wifi-apad---x9-gps-pc.aspx
Of course when we way pricey, that is compared to Netbook/Laptop. These are still in the iPad price range, with a full OS.
...exceptionally poor project portfolio management.
Unless James was right, and this is just MSFT trying to rain on competitors' parades.
Unless James was right, and this is just MSFT trying to rain on competitors' parades.
I don't understand why MS don't use the X-box operating system to drive a tablet device. It's a simplified interface that's designed for a limited control input system (handheld controller), so it could surely be adapted very easily for a touch interface. It also runs quickly and efficiently - it starts up fast and runs with very little slowdown anywhere. Development tools are readily and widely available, even for home users through stuff like XNA.
The Question is can MS catchup. Appple did it once but they had to bring Jobs back - perhaps Gates can help out his old friend.
I don't think so. They have had a perfectly usable Tablet OS for years. Windows 7 improves that and does allow it to run quite fine on slate devices. I'm running it on an 8 year old TC1100. Of course it can't do everything owing to the age of the hardware, but it runs fine and performance is good.
Slashgear has a video showing the Hanvon slate running Windows 7 beside an iPad. The results are telling:
http://www.slashgear.com/windows-7-takes-on-ipad-and-holds-its-own-0696865/
Here is an artist's take on Windows 7 on a slate device as compared to the iPad, too:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrA9UvZtRFA&feature=player_embedded
I should add that her slate is a three year old model and she prefers it to the iPad.
A lot of folks talk about a "mouse oriented OS" or words to that effect. Really, the main difficulty with Windows 7 and your finger is the size of the OS widgets. That is easily rectifiable by simply using the built-in OS capabilities to make them larger.
Slashgear has a video showing the Hanvon slate running Windows 7 beside an iPad. The results are telling:
http://www.slashgear.com/windows-7-takes-on-ipad-and-holds-its-own-0696865/
Here is an artist's take on Windows 7 on a slate device as compared to the iPad, too:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrA9UvZtRFA&feature=player_embedded
I should add that her slate is a three year old model and she prefers it to the iPad.
A lot of folks talk about a "mouse oriented OS" or words to that effect. Really, the main difficulty with Windows 7 and your finger is the size of the OS widgets. That is easily rectifiable by simply using the built-in OS capabilities to make them larger.
Microsoft?s focus is on the desktop/server arena and their accompanied software; cash cows. Mobile devices were the Trojan horse that they did not expect and inadvertently writing off the mass consumer market but do not write them off, they still can do it ? if they tried/cared.
With the various versions of WinCE, WMO, etc. the issues were around: battery life, COMMUNICATIONS, price points, usability factors, app screen vs. keyboard. Few of the companies that did create the devices focused on end user usability ? unless you were one of the specialized device makers; Intermec/Norand, Symbol, Teltronkics, etc. MS Reader and the 5 or 6 of us that have read complete books using it was great! The mobile devices at the time when there was focus were not ready for prime time; and win based tablets/pda type solutions have been around for a very long time --- check out some of Fujitsus or the other players listed.
Ubiquitous communications supported by battery life helped with the general population reach. Not everyone is a computer engineer ? ask the general population to configure a _wireless network connection_ forget at the time special adapters, if they were not embedded in the device, were required for the networks of the time they first came out: CDPD, CDMA, ARDIS, MOBITEX, etc.
Software were written like desktop apps; it can not be done that way (keyboards, mice, etc.). The logical step was to start from a smaller footprint and work up which worked for Apple (e.g.: iPhone to iPad). Let us also put some of this hardware in perspective; Newton was a failure due to similar issues. The difference is that Apple, consumer focused, and their ability to fail allowed them to succeed. The iPhone/iPad interface made it easy for users to approach the media focused device. The price point is still expensive but it is a premium device.
Microsoft has brilliant people working for them; their size, in touch points with computing, prevents them being nibble. If the FTC did break them up, I would have been scared of the mini-softs. As for the win7 mobile the sdks look like they have promise and the hardware is definitely out there.
Good luck MS.
With the various versions of WinCE, WMO, etc. the issues were around: battery life, COMMUNICATIONS, price points, usability factors, app screen vs. keyboard. Few of the companies that did create the devices focused on end user usability ? unless you were one of the specialized device makers; Intermec/Norand, Symbol, Teltronkics, etc. MS Reader and the 5 or 6 of us that have read complete books using it was great! The mobile devices at the time when there was focus were not ready for prime time; and win based tablets/pda type solutions have been around for a very long time --- check out some of Fujitsus or the other players listed.
Ubiquitous communications supported by battery life helped with the general population reach. Not everyone is a computer engineer ? ask the general population to configure a _wireless network connection_ forget at the time special adapters, if they were not embedded in the device, were required for the networks of the time they first came out: CDPD, CDMA, ARDIS, MOBITEX, etc.
Software were written like desktop apps; it can not be done that way (keyboards, mice, etc.). The logical step was to start from a smaller footprint and work up which worked for Apple (e.g.: iPhone to iPad). Let us also put some of this hardware in perspective; Newton was a failure due to similar issues. The difference is that Apple, consumer focused, and their ability to fail allowed them to succeed. The iPhone/iPad interface made it easy for users to approach the media focused device. The price point is still expensive but it is a premium device.
Microsoft has brilliant people working for them; their size, in touch points with computing, prevents them being nibble. If the FTC did break them up, I would have been scared of the mini-softs. As for the win7 mobile the sdks look like they have promise and the hardware is definitely out there.
Good luck MS.
What tablet strategy?
I can't help but agree. As an IT Manager, I've spent much time thinking about how to open up our resources to folks with iPhones, Android Devices and even a couple of Palm Pre's. No Windows Mobile Devices have been seen in quite a while. This is one of the most exciting areas in personal computing in some time, and MSFT is missing the boat. Your blog entry could easily be adapted into the type of Business Cases we used to read at my MBA program years ago...especially about maturing companies that are facing a fork in the road.
you no doubt are sitting there with your Windows workstations running MS Office on your part or all Windows server network running MS server applications posting this via IE 8.
No?
No?
I was a the perfect candidate to buy a Tablet PC and had to learn about them by accident years ago. As a physician doing many home visits I was looking foward to the the next generation of Pocket PC's to use in tandem with a laptop. While waiting for the iPAQ 600 series to come out, I stumbled upon people talking about something called a "Tablet PC", which I had never heard of, though they had been out for a year or two by then.
Ideal for students, without comparison for medical encounters, they have made only a little dent- in part, as I understand it, because initial marketing for business flopped and then they were only known to members of the "secret Tablet societies".
Tablet XP with 3rd party handwriting apps on a higher powered PC than my 2002 NEC (a 900 MHz+ CPU) without EM interference issues is all I ever wanted for Christmas. (I was interested in seeing the new generation iPhone having problems depending on how one held it. The NEC was well known for the "floating cursor"- commonly solved by additional aluminum foil shielding placed strategically inside by the owners.)
The phenomenon of the iPAD reveals that MS squandered their early lead. The experience known as Vista was no help, either.
Ideal for students, without comparison for medical encounters, they have made only a little dent- in part, as I understand it, because initial marketing for business flopped and then they were only known to members of the "secret Tablet societies".
Tablet XP with 3rd party handwriting apps on a higher powered PC than my 2002 NEC (a 900 MHz+ CPU) without EM interference issues is all I ever wanted for Christmas. (I was interested in seeing the new generation iPhone having problems depending on how one held it. The NEC was well known for the "floating cursor"- commonly solved by additional aluminum foil shielding placed strategically inside by the owners.)
The phenomenon of the iPAD reveals that MS squandered their early lead. The experience known as Vista was no help, either.
LOL.
In every class that I'm in taking notes on my X61t, people come up to me and tell me what a "cool" thing that is... 8 years after they released the first tablets. That is a display of absolute failing at marketing. Students think they are cool, but don't know about them or how to get them. Then if they do find out, they cost nearly $2k which makes people forget about them fast.
We were looking for Dell to make the tablet a Commodity, but riding MS' footsteps of failure(as always) they released the XT @ $2,500. I'd bet they have yet to earn their engineering costs back on that mis-guided venture.
I'm not sure that lack of innovation is hurting the american economy, its more like absolute stupidity.
In every class that I'm in taking notes on my X61t, people come up to me and tell me what a "cool" thing that is... 8 years after they released the first tablets. That is a display of absolute failing at marketing. Students think they are cool, but don't know about them or how to get them. Then if they do find out, they cost nearly $2k which makes people forget about them fast.
We were looking for Dell to make the tablet a Commodity, but riding MS' footsteps of failure(as always) they released the XT @ $2,500. I'd bet they have yet to earn their engineering costs back on that mis-guided venture.
I'm not sure that lack of innovation is hurting the american economy, its more like absolute stupidity.
Their lack of any kind of plan for mobile platforms is just a preview for the rest of MicroSoft. Once a bean counter gets in charge of a company, all they can see is immediate payoffs. They start to look at the large outlay for programmers, software engineers, etc... and start looking for people to lay off. If they do not replace Ballmer soon, MS will be a thing of the past.
"If they do not replace Ballmer soon, MS will be a thing of the past."
But mightn't that be a GOOD thing?
But mightn't that be a GOOD thing?
If you look around you, and go to the Apple Store near you, and then go to a PC store, and back to the Apple Store, and stand and listen at both stores to questions from customers, I think you'll find it interesting how Microsoft is quickly leaving the scene of many peoples lives, lock, stock and barrel.
is they have different primary customer bases.
Microsoft's primary focus is the corporate enterprise customer. That is where the cash flow comes from. Direct individual users are a secondary concern.
Apple is just the opposite. They are a consumer oriented company, which has made few inroads in the enterprise market.
When you go to the Apple/PC store, you are only getting the consumer side of the equation.
I'm not saying Microsoft does not need to do better with consumers - they absolutely do. But individual consumers are such a small part of the Microsoft pie that comparing PC stores to Apple stores is not really that significant.
Microsoft's primary focus is the corporate enterprise customer. That is where the cash flow comes from. Direct individual users are a secondary concern.
Apple is just the opposite. They are a consumer oriented company, which has made few inroads in the enterprise market.
When you go to the Apple/PC store, you are only getting the consumer side of the equation.
I'm not saying Microsoft does not need to do better with consumers - they absolutely do. But individual consumers are such a small part of the Microsoft pie that comparing PC stores to Apple stores is not really that significant.
If the iPad and iPhone and ... is an Apple product, targeted at the Consumer Market, and Microsoft is targeting the business market, then are they really competition for each other?
I think there are 10x the number of consumer items to be sold compared to the number of "business" items to be sold. Why? because there are families that will have 4 or 5 of something compared to the 1 or 2 working in the business world. Each family member will have more than one device in many cases, just because of how fast the devices change and what they "want". 4-5 x 2 is 10x.
Microsoft is in a downward spiral, and the consumer learning about Apple products will only provide more pressure in the business marketplace for something besides windows.
Did someone sell Linux into business use, or did IT staff that knew about it and had interest in the benefits of open source and lower cost provide the bigger pressure for change?
Staff voted with their feet to pick Linux in shops that are running it. It was not "windows" so they had to know how to drive it.
The same thing will happen to Microsoft in the desktop and portable device space. Consumer familiarity and preferences will always provide pressure on business lock-in.
I think there are 10x the number of consumer items to be sold compared to the number of "business" items to be sold. Why? because there are families that will have 4 or 5 of something compared to the 1 or 2 working in the business world. Each family member will have more than one device in many cases, just because of how fast the devices change and what they "want". 4-5 x 2 is 10x.
Microsoft is in a downward spiral, and the consumer learning about Apple products will only provide more pressure in the business marketplace for something besides windows.
Did someone sell Linux into business use, or did IT staff that knew about it and had interest in the benefits of open source and lower cost provide the bigger pressure for change?
Staff voted with their feet to pick Linux in shops that are running it. It was not "windows" so they had to know how to drive it.
The same thing will happen to Microsoft in the desktop and portable device space. Consumer familiarity and preferences will always provide pressure on business lock-in.
Do you really think that consumer purchasing outweighs business purchasing in IT devices? The problem with the current Apple devices is they don't fit into an enterprise model. Blackberry is still outselling iPhone.... enterprise device. PC's are still outselling Mac's..... enterprise device.
I, personally, have exactly one PC for work, and then an iMac for personal video, a mac book pro for iPhone/iPad development, an iPhone 1G, 3GS and 4 for development, and two iPads for development. I have two intel machines running open solaris for media storage and backup with 15TB of space.
The rest of my household, collectively, has a Mac Book Air, another iPhone 1G, iPod touch 1G and an iPhone 4, 2 Vista desktops, which go largely unused now, and are only setting there for time when the iMac or Macbook Air are in use and someone needs a computer (or they'd just grab an iPad).
3 PCs
2 Open Solaris Intel Boxes
11 Apple
Is my situation normal? Perhaps not, but what will peoples next choices be? PC, Apple or what?
The rest of my household, collectively, has a Mac Book Air, another iPhone 1G, iPod touch 1G and an iPhone 4, 2 Vista desktops, which go largely unused now, and are only setting there for time when the iMac or Macbook Air are in use and someone needs a computer (or they'd just grab an iPad).
3 PCs
2 Open Solaris Intel Boxes
11 Apple
Is my situation normal? Perhaps not, but what will peoples next choices be? PC, Apple or what?
The desktop will be around for some time to come. Add to that that there's a sucker born every minute and Microsoft will be around for some time to come.
Am I reading the TITLE of this article incorrectly? I thought "Apotheosis" meant exaltation, etc...
"Microsoft's misguided tablet strategy is the apotheosis of the company" does not make much sense to me, at any rate. Then again, neither does Microsoft's tablet....
"Microsoft's misguided tablet strategy is the apotheosis of the company" does not make much sense to me, at any rate. Then again, neither does Microsoft's tablet....
Apotheosis is derived from the Greek word meaning "turn into a god."
Since we don't create many new gods these days, we've watered it down somewhat, but it still means the deification someone or something; we also use it to describe an excellent idea or thing: The iPhone is (allegedly) the apotheosis of cellular technology.
-- Tim
Timothy J. McGowan
Since we don't create many new gods these days, we've watered it down somewhat, but it still means the deification someone or something; we also use it to describe an excellent idea or thing: The iPhone is (allegedly) the apotheosis of cellular technology.
-- Tim
Timothy J. McGowan
I also was confused by the comment and thought of it more like an irony.
Probably you should name it "apoptosis", which a mechanism in the cell (in pluricellular organisms) that triggers a programmed death under certain circumstances... probably from your article, that is what's happening to Microsoft!
Probably you should name it "apoptosis", which a mechanism in the cell (in pluricellular organisms) that triggers a programmed death under certain circumstances... probably from your article, that is what's happening to Microsoft!
I agree with you Tim. I don't get the illustration. "Apotheosis?" Wrong use of the word. But the idea that Microsoft's Windows 7 uses too much on the way of resources is absolutely correct. Question, how does Microsoft not know this?? or why do they continue to ignore this?
- namely, what on earth *could* they do about it? Rebuild Windows from the ground up, at last , and break compatibility with their entire market thus far?
Remove some of the massive bloat from the OS and reveal the truth to the public, that it's nothing but an OS kernel and window manager? Everything else is an application and can be kept separate? "We lied to you all along when we said a photo manager, text editor, and web browser were core parts of your operating system. Truth is, we coulda sold you the bare bones for $30 and let you choose the rest for yourselves. Sorry!"
Fact is, the situation is such that they've got very little wiggle room left at all. It's almost enough to make me feel sorry for them. Almost.
Remove some of the massive bloat from the OS and reveal the truth to the public, that it's nothing but an OS kernel and window manager? Everything else is an application and can be kept separate? "We lied to you all along when we said a photo manager, text editor, and web browser were core parts of your operating system. Truth is, we coulda sold you the bare bones for $30 and let you choose the rest for yourselves. Sorry!"
Fact is, the situation is such that they've got very little wiggle room left at all. It's almost enough to make me feel sorry for them. Almost.
How long can Bill sit on his hands and watch his baby go down the drrain?
Bill has a large percentage of the cash flow from the US in the profits of Microsoft, and is now distributing them world wide, to good causes. He's having fun, and enjoying the smiles he is putting on other peoples faces. Would you rather do that, or stare and Balmers face and argue about tablet PCs?
Chances are, Bill has an iPad...
Chances are, Bill has an iPad...
not sure what you are talking about, this may allow you to rewrite this article. :P
http://forum.eeeuser.com/viewtopic.php?id=85235
i have a lenovo s10-3t and love it.
http://forum.eeeuser.com/viewtopic.php?id=85235
i have a lenovo s10-3t and love it.
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
