Discussion on:

Tablets will replace PCs for many enterprise users

That's the only reason I see that a company can't go Tablet PC (and this includes legacy peripheral compatibility). And unfortunately, that's a big enough issue to prevent it from happening. I'd love to see our company change to Tablets for a majority of our functions but we still have 1 software package that is Copyright 1987. The last place I worked for had software Copyright 1999. Both of those were critical ERP systems. I started the process of upgrading the last ERP system and now am working on the one for my current company but there is always a lot of hesitation and pushback for such large changes and I suspect many companies are in the exact same situation.

I'd love an HTML 5 based system since they can be used by PC, Mac, Tablet or Smartphone but I just don't realistically see it happening for 10+ years.

Legacy software is what the mainframe users used to say would stop mini computers, then PCs. It didn't.

Since Y2K companies have been much better at sweating ICT assets but the bottom line is they upgrade in the end.

Also, never forget that old, old, adage: There is nothing in ICT that can't be fixed with a layer of abstraction. Comm's Server anyone?

It's an old adage that holds true today because it is practical. I can't imagine most people wanting to plug in a personal device at work and do work with it. I also can't imagine most companies allowing that either.

There are very few professions that honestly benefit from the mobilitiy of a tablet. I can see that there are certain things that it is way better for. These professionals already carry a company laptop around. They are always looking for something smaller.

In most cases I think that the tablet is still better for a personal device. As mentioned, many people have smartphones that can already function as a computer when docked. I can see this being popular for consumers but there is no way I am going to plug my personal phone in to a dock at my place of work.

The "using personal equipment at work" debate is irrelevant. Some companies will allow employees to use personal tablets in their offices, and some won't.

If you allow personal devices to connect to your network, then you deserve to be hacked! No company should allow an employee's personal device to connect to a corporate network...NEVER!!! This is just asking for trouble!

With suitable security infrastructure in place you can probably reduce the risks to a manageable level.

However I would think it would be an absolutely huge task and you'd have to do some serious cost/benefit work to justify it in many cases.

Remember what your mother would say right before you pick something up that you have never seen before: "Don't touch that you don't know where it has been." Mom is right and the same thing goes for personal device. While on the LAN you do have some control over it, but once it leaves the building, then it is just like Mom said. Once that happens you don't know what it going to be brought back into you network. Remember Stuxnet did not arrive in Iran via e-mail or a firewall attack, but through a USB flash drive or a laptop. You may not have a centrifuge to protect, but I am sure there are resources that you do need to keep safe. Personal devices just makes it that much harder.

But we found many of our infections sources were work provided laptops and storage devices.

Let's face it mobile devices connect to other networks than our own (think of all those road warriors out there).

The issue isn't is the device personal or corporate but is the device adequately protected and does the user take care when accessing other networks.

Even if your company will allow you to plug in your personal device, i'm not sure i would want to have restrictive policies downloaded onto my own device. Also, as a private individual there are sites i may go to that could be at odds with the ethos of my company. I might for example be a regular contributor to anti-globalisation sites. I might even be using a device belonging to one of my company's competitors. Finally, I don't like the idea that personal content might be subject to corporate scrutiny - which should be the case if a company wishes to protect its corporate image as represented by its employees.

Users here got quite excited when a new e-mail project said they would be able to sync their mail to their iPhones. The excitement dropped off steeply when they discovered they would have to submit to corporate security which meant the company would have the right to remote wipe their phone if it was deemed a security problem.

In terms of the corporate/personal debate I think this is probably where the true meat of the argument lies.

However, in your article you said, "Each morning, youll come in, place your tablet in the dock, and turn on the monitor." as your vision of what the future will bring.

If we're not bringing our "personal" tablet in, then we're apparently bringing the corporation's tablet in... but if we're coming into work every day, we're not working from home, so we don't *need* to take the corporate tablet home. We don't even need to *have* a corporate tablet, because if we don't need the mobility a tablet provides we don't need the extra price.

Example: cheapest Windows 7 tablet on bestbuy.com is the Arcos 9 (1.2GHz Intel Atom Z515 processor, 60GB hard drive, 1GB DDR2 RAM), at $410, $500 if I get the cheapest in-store/online available monitor to get a larger display (20" HP LCD widescreen). The cheapest non-refurbished desktop on the same site is the Compaq Presario CQ5814 (1.GHz AMD E-350 dual-core processor, 500GB hard drive, 3GB DDR3 RAM) for $270, $360 with that monitor. Is the desktop's processor needed? Possibly, but possibly not. Is the desktop's hard drive space needed? Only if they're going to manipulate a lot of video/image files, otherwise no. Is the RAM needed? I'd say yes: both are running Windows 7, & I imagine that 1GB will run a lot slower than 3GB. The biggest thing? For the tablet's lower specs, it costs 50% more than the desktop (39% more if I throw in a monitor), & I'd still have to shell out for a keyboard & mouse, if not a full-blown docking station. From an acquisition perspective, then, the higher mobility of the laptop is offset by its higher acquisition cost & smaller margin for future performance. And that's just for a single purchase made off-the-shelf, as opposed to possible volume purchases from a vendor.

I run a small IT support team and we are already getting requests from people who want to get work e-mail on their personal phones and iPads.

Our corporate IT division are already looking at giving people VPN access from their personal machines to let them work from home without having to provide a laptop or second desktop.

I'm also aware of members of the programming team who run linux desktops with windows in virtualisation for those few tasks that can't be done otherwise.

Finally, given the choice I would much rather be working from my Macbook Pro than my current windows PC (and before anyone thinks this is a mac vs PC rant it's not, I think both OS are good and it's really a matter of personal preference).

I and most of my co-workers like the fact that, after the workday is done, we *don't* have to worry about responding to work-related emails & messages. The last thing we'd want is to have our phones -- or even home desktops/laptops -- set to access our work emails.

We can't make sweeping generalisations either way... I have some folk who want this, you have some folk that don't.

Keeps life interesting eh?

quote "Within five years, I believe many office workspaces will consist of a docking station, keyboard, mouse or trackpad, and large monitor(s). Each morning, you???ll come in, place your tablet in the dock, and turn on the monitor. You???ll still use the keyboard, mouse, and monitor for creating content, but you???ll actually be doing it on a tablet (or maybe even a smarthphone)."

If an office worker has to go through that, they effectively have a device that is
readily available, inexpensively, right now! It's called a "laptop computer"...maybe
TR should do an article on these devices. I think they could revolutionize computing.

Then you also run the gammet of various laws and regulations in regards to
corporate property and responsibilty, not to mention private information as it
relates to HIPPA and PPI...no, it won't be in 5 years...maybe 15??

I imagine this spawned some lively discussion.

I'd like to see what you describe in five years, but I think it will take longer. Of 230 systems where I work, 80% are still running XP; 15% still have CRTs. We don't upgrade until there's a demonstrated need, and I don't see that happening where I work. I admit it's a manufacturing facility, and mobility and after-hours access matter to less than 20% of our employees. I also question the use of personal systems in the workplace.

In terms of performance and bang for buck, Desktops (as in a computer tower) will always (at least for a while...) be more powerful than Tablets. More room for larger and more powerful components. Can't pack a GTX590 and as many HDDs into a Tablet.. Yet...

However for the HDD thing, micro-SD cards are hitting the 32 and 64GB mark O.O

I know very few enterprise users who fully utilize their desktop's processing power. Perhaps someone editing HD video, doing CAD work, or running complex simulations needs a true "workstation". But, the average sales rep. or business analyst doesn't.

I'm using an i5 laptop with windows 7x64 and 8GB of ram and even that isn't enough for me...I have a second desktop with similar specs and a 4u rack server at my disposal if I need more horse power! Why? I manage hundreds of servers across a dozen datacenters and at any given time, I have 10-15 remote desktop sessions opened...and these things take their toll on my poor laptop. For me to do my job properly, I need horsepower, tons of ram and a wide open network...otherwise things slow to a crawl!

There will always be users that need the fastest computers like you do, but in most companies those users are few and far between.

Why'd you go with an i5 laptop anyway if you knew you'd be such a heavy user? Seems to me i7 would have been a better choice.

How many users that you support need that same capability that you do??? Power users don't understand why every human being that uses a computer doesn't need a super computer like they want. It's beyond their comprehension. Personally, I would like to get my hands on the Nvidia super computer but at $10,000.00 for the base system, that's not going to happen for a while.
Believe it or not, they do not need much at all. That's why tablets are a hit. They get the job done in a fraction of the time it takes to wait on a laptop to boot and shutdown.

Maybe the $1k+ CAD workstation's equivalent for the salesperson can be a $400.00 desktop for order input and a $600.00 tablet for mobile research, UCC, and order tracking, etc.

If the price point starts falling faster then tablets could look to replace many corporate desktops. For those places that are at risk of them "walking off" then you will see desktops replaced with dumb terminals. Only small shops wouldn't do that and even they may head the tablet route. It may not be better but it will be "good enough" for most business users. $500 PC's are fairly powerful, but they are also underutilized for most tasks. It's only the niche power users, developers, engineers, etc, that need the more powerful systems in which case they are not getting $500 desktops.

If the tablet makers can figure out the peripherals and not get us stuck in carrying around a spool full of cables then the tablet may become the standard business device. My company deploys laptops all over, I know many that would love to use a tablet instead if they could doc it and still connect to the various remote systems they need. Even many developers would love to have their development tools accessible from a tablet while their code is run on a build server some place.

The key factor is "$500 PC's" .

A decent tablet is also around 500$ except you get a dinky little 10" screen compared to the 19" to 24" screens that are standard for a desktop.

There is a direct relation between screen size and productivity because you can process more information at a glance. Therefore tablets in their native form are useles for any data intensive application.

Of course you can add an external monitor and keyboard and mouse and dockingstation to address the above deficiencies, but that will mean you have to pay a few 100 bucks more for an inherently limited device. The only way a tablet will ever become a contender is if the tablet price is about 75% less than a PC. Then it will be a case of "you get less but you pay less".

Techies and business men are not idiots. They know when they are getting screwed.

A last comment :
The problem that I have is that the media is marketing tablets as the next universal computing solution. The fact is that tablets address a niche market. They're excellent , but expensive, tools for their niche application.

If you've got money to burn and a fondness for funky gadgets, then a tablet is for you. Anybody else will be better server by a desktop/notebook computer

I don't drive my car with my foot flat on the floor, but when I go up a hill it's good that there is enough power to do it without needing to get out and push the thing.

And I have System Explorer telling me that most of the time I run my computer around 15%-25% utilization, but every now-and-then the utilization spikes. Even now I have to wait for it to finish doing "whatever," so if I had a less-powerful machine, I would just have to wait longer.

How many of us have joked about "Waiting for the Windows Hourglass?" I waste plenty of time as it is, waiting for the computer to do what I asked; I don't need something with less capability to waste more time every day.

I know my employer is often frustrated by the amount of time employees spend "Waiting for Windows", and customers on the phone hate waiting too. A lesser system would only make the problem worse.

I think the tablet will not replace many desktop, but it can replace may be 50%. It's all depends on the nature of the jobs in the enterprise.

There are still a lot of jobs where tablet or mobility is not needed, and hence tablet will not reach that part of the jobs.

Bill,

Once again a very interesting article. However I am afraid that I am going to have to disagree with you again.

Utility
Tablets have been very good at data output, displaying video, pictures and web content. What they have never been good at is inputting data. Picture this:
We are sitting next to each other on a plane. You pull out your tablet, you get an email, that needs you to revise a proposal, you see that a lot of edits have to be done so you get out your keyboard, witch means you have to go into your bag and get your keyboard and hook it to your tablet. So you begin working, its a little awkward moving the pointer with your finger and then typing so then you get out your mouse, then you remember some of the numbers you need to add are on a thumb drive and go to plug it into you tablet but realize that the two usb connecters are taken up by your keyboard and your mouse so you now have to fish out your usb hub.

I get a similar email on my laptop, I have been finished for the last 10 minutes and ringing the flight attended for another drink

Security
I am also disturbed by your final idea, of the idea that at work your desk will be nothing but a docking station for your tablet., First of all I am not really comfortable with the idea of someone carrying an extremely expensive and highly thief attractive device with company data on it. (Yes I know that happens with laptops now and I don't like that either)

Between technology's like cloud sharing, SharePoint, rdp and VPN connections there should be no reason why sensitive company data should be outside the company network.

I think I would rather provide access to those and other technology's and let the user use there choice of devices from home, and make them do there heavy lifting at the office where I can manage the equipment and the environment.

No Windows Tablet (Yet)
Businesses run on windows. Love it or hate it, its the way it is. The new Windows 8 for tablets is not looking good. I think the boys in Redmond are going to have to do the Vista scramble again. Yet until that happens there are not going to replace desktops.

Longevity and ability to repurpose.
Desktops have stayed around because they last, with upgrades and maintenance a desktop can be useful for about 5 or 6 years. They can be repurposed if a company outsources a department the leftover machines can be reused elsewhere. The same thing for Laptops to a lesser extent.

What can be upgraded on a tablet? The form factor is following the model of the cell phone. We are okay with replacing a cell phone every few years because they come cheep with the service contracts. Since tablets are based on cellphone technology your pretty much locked into that set of hardware. The way that technology changes, the way business can change there are times you need more power, more disk space more video capability now. With a desktop its a simple upgrade with a tablet impossible. Sure you can expand a tablets capability with a docking station, but then what's the point of having a tablet?

I have said this before and I will say it again. Tablets for the most part are toys, we need better tools.

I agree with many of your observations about current tablets, but I think you're ignoring how tablets (and computing in general) is likely to evolves in the future.

Let me address each of you points:

1. Utility - Indeed creating content on current tablets can be more difficult than on a laptop or desktop. I've tried to write a 1,000 word blog post on the iPad's on-screen keyboard. I found it frustrating to say the least. But this will change. Tablets will eventually support keyboards, mice, trackpads, printers, monitors, etc. With proper peripheral support, they can be just as effective at content creation as a desktop.

2. Security - You actually address your own criticism of my proposal. If at all possible, sensitive data should not be stored on mobile devices. Store it in the cloud or on internal corporate servers. When data must come mobile, IT should safeguard that data through security best practices.

3. No Windows - True, Windows still dominates the personal computer market, especially in the enterprise. Two things here: First, just because Microsoft rules the market now doesn't me they will in the future. Second, Windows 8, with it's Metro interface, is a clear sign that Microsoft understands the potential of tablets, and wants to keep my first point from occurring.

4. Longevity and ability to repurpose - While tablets aren't upgradable like desktops, we're moving into a time when they won't need to be. Prices will come down to a point where it will make economic sense to use a tablet for a year or two and then recycle it. I see many businesses keeping a stash of replacement tablets on hand. When one breaks, they hand you a new one and send you on your way. (Just as many do with smartphones today.) Upgrades will be treated in a similar fashion. Every year or so, you'll be issued a new tablet. As most of the heavy computing will be done in the cloud, any major updates will be made on the server-side not on the tablet side.

Utility: Ok, I'll give you that proposal, up to a point. Yes, having the separate keyboard might be an annoyance, but did you need it while you were reading that email? What if, in a later email the sender has done all that work for you? Guess what, now you don't need to go digging for all that extra stuff. But even if not, what are you doing with that data on a thumb drive when your most current data is already right in front of you in that tablet. Don't you know how to cut and paste? Honestly your description went out of its way to make things harder than they should have been.
Security: I'll grant you this one--marginally. Unlike that laptop, if you discover your tablet is stolen you can 'wipe' it from your smart phone--on at least one brand. Not only that, but the tablet can tell you where it is and help you to recover it. That's already happened more than once, to the detriment of the thief.
Windows Tablet: Windows is truly far too much OS for a tablet form factor as evidenced by the fact that Apple sold more tablets in nine months than all Windows tablets combined in ten years. If you ask me, this is more due to a serious lack of 'touch' support from Windows developers than any real lack of capability. Even now Windows Touch is very crude compared to any other touch system. The "Metro" interface is a step in the right direction, but considering the ability to disable Metro, I don't see any serious moves forward in Windows for a few years yet.
Longevity and repurposing: The average life of an enterprise PC is about three years, not 5-6 years. Yes, in a home environment and some corporate uses they may last longer, but that replacement is based more on how often they have to replace them, not how often they want to replace them. A tablet can last just as long when reasonably cared for but I do expect they'll improve far more quickly than the desktop hardware does over the next few years. As far as repurposing? Anything a desktop can do, a tablet can do, as long as you stay within the hardware limits. Tablets are just as re-purposible as desktops or laptops.

Tablets truly are functional productivity devices, within their limits. To ignore a device's potential is to find yourself left behind when that potential becomes reality.

Utility: You mentioned that "What if, in a later email the sender has done all that work for you?" Why would he have bothered you at all with any e-mails if he was going to do the corrections himself? The only reason for him to have sent the e-mail was for you to do the corrections, therefore, you would indeed need to pull out all of the stuff he mentioned. A laptop has everything except for the printer built in already. The laptop gets the vote there.

Windows Tablet: It doesn't matter if it is far too much for a tablet to run because no matter what the business world will always run on Windows. That is just the way it works. It will remain like that until Apple has the good sense to let the bottom fall out on the prices of their products.

Security: My personal laptop has a fingerprint scanner and a webcam built in to identify the user so that unregistered users can't access it. It wouldn't be that difficult for laptop makers to include GPS chips in the laptops so that if it gets stolen or misplaced then you can find it just as easily as that tablet. Onstar already does it with vehicles, so it would make sense that it would be just as easy if not easier to do it with laptops.

No Windows tablets yet?

Acer Iconia W500
Archos 9 PC
ASUS Eee Slate EP121-1A010M
Dell Inspiron Duo
ViewSonic ViewPad 10pro Dual OS

SerrJ215 meant not Windows 8 tablets yet. His comment about W8 not meeting rave reviews might make sense if he'd limited those reviews to desktop systems. I don't like it there either, but it looks like it would be marvelous on tablets. It's too soon to tell and, as you note, there have been Windows tablets since XP.

From my perspective, tablets are closer to very very very large SmartPhones than they are to real computers. The biggest differentiators are:

1) No attached keyboard. Ok, with a regular desktop computer the keyboard is separate, but it is expected to be separate and the computer is not a mobile device. But, at least with a laptop, it's still an "all-in-one" package. Without a keyboard, any type of real typing or data entry is virtually impossible. Before you say, "What about voice recognition", remember, we're talking about corporate users and many large corporations have cubes to house their employees. Having everyone talk to their computer simply won't cut the mustard.

2) Screen. Although tablets screens are bigger than a smart phone, the resolution, well, it still is not up to par. I have been using laptops with screen resolutions of 1600x1200 and more recently 1920x1200 for years now. Tablets simply don't have that type of resolution. For example, the ARCHOS Tablet - 10.1" (the larger one) has a 1280x800 resolution or fewer than HALF the number of pixels on 1920x1200 or even a 1920x1080 (which just happens to be the "Hi-Def" standard) laptop. So, forget about watching hi-def movies on a tablet - even 720P won't work!

3) Storage. tablets simply don't have the same amount of storage that laptops/desktops do. Most tablets max out at 16gb or 64gb. With the general BLOAT of everything Microsoft, you can't turn around in 16gb these days much less do very much useful. Install just a few applications and you could be out of memory. Then so much for watching that movie you wanted to download and watch on the trip, let alone take along several movies if you're on vacation. Storage is even more critical these days with Digital Cameras having more and more megapixels. My son's Canon T2i Rebel is an 18 mp camera and since he uses photoshop down the road, he likes to save in both jpeg and raw mode, meaning each picture takes up about 23 megabytes.

4) Raw processing power. I don't think you'll be seeing any tablets with any i7 processors, yet if you really want to do some heavy duty computing, this is the chip you need.

5) Expandability/Maintainability/Flexibility: All of these are major issues. I can easily open a desktop computer and replace ANY component, so when something breaks it's easy to replace. That includes upgrading the motherboard/cpu if I feel the need, but, in reality, I have found that desktops typically last at least 5-8 years if properly purposed. I am using computers at home right now that I built in the 2003-2004 time frame. What have I done to them? I upgraded the Video, added memory, and more hard disk space. Trivial - and cheap - to do with a desktop. I am building my next generation development/video processing system right now using an Asus Rampage III Extreme motherboard, 12 gb of ram, and 2x 2Tb drives mirrored with an Nvidia 580 GPU. I can add another video card to run in SLI configuration (and for additional processing power if I want to run custom apps).

6) The Real World: I have worked on many projects that involve actually manufacturing something over an extended period of time. The last project I worked on will be in the manufacturing phase for somewhere between 10-20 years and will be in some type of sustainment phase beyond that. The computers used for this are running Windows XP and will need to continue to be running Windows XP for quite some time to come. Newer Operating systems mean new(er) versions of software and that often means software re-writes, further testing, etc, all of which is an unnecessary burden in an environment such as this.

All in all, I believe that tablets are great marketing for some people but anyone that needs a REAL computer, well, they just don't cut the mustard.

1) No attached keyboard. Up to a point, I'll give you this one--but not very far. Just as a keyboard is 'available' for a desktop, keyboards are usable with tablets too--often the same one if needed. Bluetooth makes it easy. Yes, a keyboard is the most logical tool for text-extensive work, but it's not needed for every single application so tends to just take up space and add bulk when you're working mobile.

2) Screen. You speak of 'resolution' when what you mean is 'real estate'. Yes, I know you discussed the 1900x1200 resolution of that laptop, but how big is the screen itself? Now put that same resolution on a screen 1/3 the size and explain to me how it's going to even be legible without a magnifying glass? What you have to consider is the scale of the screens rather than the resolution, whereupon the average desktop and even laptop have much bigger screens. As far as watching movies? 99% of average users wouldn't care what the resolution is, as long as the display is clear and not pixelated. Really, prove to me that you can see the difference between 720p and 1020p on a laptop screen at full-screen display. Quite honestly, the difference is even less on a tablet. It's simply a matter of scale.

3) Storage. This one I'll give you, but not for the reason you expect. Remember back to the first desktop computers and quite honestly they had far less storage than today's tablets. Quite honestly, machines didn't develop a need for Gigabyte-level storage until the applications themselves grew into the tens of Megabytes in size and now we have programs in the hundreds of Megabytes. Programs grew because the storage became available and developers grew lazy, preferring to comment-out and patch programs for later versions than re-writing them to meet new capabilities. In other words, at least for now more internal capacity is needed more for file storage than any necessity for bigger apps.

4) Raw processing power. About that... Remember, the first viable desktop computers used a simple 1Mhz 8-bit processor with a maximum RAM capacity of 48KBytes. That make our modern tablets far superior to those early machines. They've got the necessary power to perform incredible tasks--when the software is written correctly. That said, I'll grant they're not as powerful as the modern desktop, but they don't need to be, either. A tablet is a perfect supplemental device rather than a desktop replacement. I haven't replaced MY desktop with a tablet, but I have replaced my laptop with it.

5) Expandability/Maintainability/Flexibility: This one is somewhat subjective. None of these things is really all that critical for the tablet as a supplemental device; choose the size you think you need and simply take care of it. Because of its physical build, maintenance is already almost impossible, but it's still remarkably flexible in its capabilities, performing almost any type of task aimed at it within its limits without having to add/remove/replace parts to make it specialize.

6) The Real World: This is where the tablet really shines; you can quite literally use it in places where it would be impossible to use a desktop or a tablet while still giving you more screen real estate than a smart phone for the task. The problem with what you just described here is the simple fact that you have restricted the product to 10-20 year-old technologies which will make them ever more expensive to maintain. Today's products need to either adapt to new technologies as they age or have a pre-defined obsolecense point hopefully at a point where costs don't over-ride capability. Even today's smart phones have the ability to take software and OS updates through their expected functional lifetimes of two years or less. What's more interesting is that one 3-year-old smartphone model is still the #2-selling smartphone in the industry and it's still capable of taking all current versions of the OS it uses (though that may change after tomorrow.) What's more, that particular model seems headed for at least one more year on the open market where none of its peers are even available any more. You have to adapt to current real-world conditions and freezing a manufacturing product to a single point in time simply isn't economically feasible any more. Since the birth of the digital age, even heavy machinery has had to include some form of upgradeability.

So tablets need to be more than just a 'toy' and they are, whether you want to believe it or not.

"Quite honestly, machines didn't develop a need for Gigabyte-level storage until the applications themselves grew into the tens of Megabytes in size and now we have programs in the hundreds of Megabytes. Programs grew because the storage became available..."

First, isn't that circular logic? 'Machines needed gigs of storage because apps grew. Apps grew because storage was available."

Second, and more to the point, I think the growth in stored data has far exceeded the growth in program size. People are now storing more types of data than just the spreadsheets and documents of the early PC days. Music, video, movies, photos; the average home user has more space taken up with these than with the apps to access them. If those users don't mind storing that data on the Internet and playing the odds against losing access, then local storage space isn't an issue.

As many people have already said, there are to many factors that would have to be addresses before something like this happens, probably the most important would be budget, Most businesses would not want to overhaul there entire IT department, I mean I, like many have a tablet that I use for business, but I still have a computer in my office.
Obviously the need for more tablets would require more production which would probably lead to more lemons or bad parts. Right now if I have an issue with hardware I call dell, I tell them the issue and then if a part is needed, they send me the part, I open up the PC and replace the part, sure you can do the same with a tablet, but lets face it a tablet is not made to be cracked open, parts for a tables would also be impossible to come by. You cannot upgrade a tablet, you might be able to expand the storage but that is also limited to 32gb right now, which I might add is very expensive for the amount of storage you get.
Maybe like me other companies will give the tablets to people who are on the road a lot, or need to work at home, but as far as replacing an office PC, it is going to be a while before we see this transition.
The old saying goes "if it ain't broke, don???t fix it" businesses are having a hard time moving away from windows XP, so moving to Windows 8/Android or IOS would be a risk and if I have learned anything in the business world it is that risks, especially one this big is probably a risk that owners and managers will not take unless they can be sure 100% that the tablet is compatible with all hardware and software needed. All the data is 100% secure. And that doing the upgrade would not blow the budget.

You mentioned how companies are having a hard time moving forward. I just got a spiffy new i7-powered laptop. Even though it has a shiny Windows 7 sticker on it, before the IT guys gave it to me they wiped Win7 and installed a fresh copy of WinXP. If I can't get Win7 what are my chances of getting a tablet? Pretty much zero. So much for the leading edge. We can't even see it from here.

... you might find them edifying.

When you take something away from one place in the computer field is has to be made up in another. If people expect touch screens for everything thing you need a MASSIVE back end set of programmers to allow every piece of corporate software in use to be completely rewritten so that a table user can actually use it.

Not only the initial rewrite, but now you have continious updates for all of them forever - PLUS the desktop power user.

If you design for only Tablet type abilitys - no keyboard, no mice, touch only you really DO limit what the people can do.

You do NOT see programmers writing corporate applications on tablets and that is also true for a lot of the heavy corporate computing - they invented keyboards (and typewriters) for a reason - you can type a lot easier and faster than you can write longhand on a tablet.

Like can you see a bridge designer making up parts specs on a tablet? "Sorry the part was 2" short, I was using a table to design that piece and it looked right on the tablet."

That's right, Microsoft introduced their 'touch' interface over ten years ago and what happened? Nothing. The only tablet-specific apps created were by and for specific enterprise customers who wanted them to do specific tasks. Not one single developer tried to support touch in the open market. Then you wonder why Apple sold more tablets in 9 months than all Windows tablets combined in a decade.

This was laziness on the developers' part and it's kicking in the soft parts now. Microsoft really isn't helping by making its 'Metro' interface able to be disabled, turning into nothing more than a more 'prettified' Windows instead of an evolutionary shift to touch. Why should developers redesign their software when even the latest version of the OS will support the old version perfectly?

I will agree with you that tablets, by themselves, are limited; but only in scale. I really can't see an AutoCad user trying do design critical parts solely on a tablet, though he could rough a part in and finish it on the workstation back at the office.

Your history of typewriters is also in error; with the old manual typewriters it was neither faster nor easier to type--you had to have strong fingers. No, Typing was for legibility, standardizing fonts for easier character recognition. You wanted speed you used a stenographer who used Shorthand. Shorthand allowed the writer to take verbal dictation as quickly as it was spoken and then convert it to typewritten documents when the secretary had more time. A good stenographer could take dictation at speeds of 120 words per minute or faster and once electric typewriters came available they could type almost as quickly. My own mother, once an executive secretary, was capable of 160 wpm shorthand and 140 wpm typewritten. Even at almost 90 years of age she maintains in excess of 100 wpm on both today. So it's not the speed of longhand you're playing with, but rather the legibility of typing. There will almost always be a need for a keyboard for text-intensive work, but as our youth develop the skills that keyboard will be as virtual as they currently are on our tablets.

So no, your excuse is only partially valid, mostly due to difference of scale rather than due to any other limitation. The modern tablet is just as capable as the first desktop computers, but need to be significantly larger for some tasks which would really work better on a standard PC workstation.

While peripheral incompatibility still hurts in the short term, in the mid-to-long term, that will be resolved. And until that happens, the torrents of adoption just won't appear.

On the subject of another perceived stumbling block - Windows - I think two existing/evolving technologies - HTML 5 and Citrix - can completely address this. I was at a conference for a vendor, and they showed me how to run their hosted business application on my iPad. It was very impressive. Not flawless, mind you - trying to run a Windows-centric app on the iPad can be frustrating because of the mouse-and-keyboard challenges - but that it runs at all is very cool.

As many have pointed out, the iPad, the leading tablet, burns up money faster than an OC housewife and her teenage daughter, and the others are following suit.