MS Global Strategy Chief: Tablets Are a Fad 643
jfruhlinger writes "Wondering why Microsoft isn't jumping into the red-hot tablet market? Well, maybe it's because Craig Mundie, the man in charge of the company's global strategy, isn't sure if the 'big screen tablet pad category' has staying power. Of course, it's possible that tablets will go the way of the netbook, but blogger Chris Nerney calls Microsoft's seeming total inaction in the face of a hot market 'mind-boggling.'"
Improved tablets (Score:5, Funny)
I'm waiting for an improved tablet. What I would like to see is a tablet with an attached keyboard. Let's say, a device where the tablet and keyboard are joined by a hinge, so that it can be closed while not in use.
I think I'll patent that idea right now.
Re:Improved tablets (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh for the love of God Moderators!
FUNNY dammit! FUNNY! NOT "Insightful."
Re:Improved tablets (Score:5, Insightful)
Insightful is the new Funny, because Funny gets you no Karma.
This was decided years ago, by people not you.
Hope this helps.
--
BMO
Re:Improved tablets (Score:5, Informative)
The trick is to moderate "Underrated" if the comment already has a Funny moderation. Then they get karma but keep the Funny moderation.
Re:Improved tablets (Score:5, Insightful)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_XP_editions#Tablet_PC_Edition [wikipedia.org]
Tablets are a FAD... They have been working on tablets since the late 90's... They have been pushing people towards them for ages... They even developed a special build of Windows XP for them...
I think they got tired of banging the drum trying to get people to move to tablets because they missed the mark of what a tablet needs to be... or possibly just ahead of their time?
This just might be that they cannot admit that the smart phone revolution brought the last few key elements into the picture to make a tablet device a success and they didn't realize it and don't want to admit it.
Re: (Score:3)
The Newton was ahead of its time, Palm missed the boat on the media integration and hardware upgrades.
Microsoft missed the mark by so much because they tried to cram their desktop OS onto a tablet computer.
Re: (Score:3)
Microsoft missed the mark by so much because they tried to cram their desktop OS onto a tablet computer.
I take issue with this - I think Microsoft missed the mark by so much because they let branding drive all their decision making. A Windows tablet needed to have a Windows "Start" button and a recognizable Windows menu, for instance. Cramming their Desktop OS onto a tablet was considered a strategic move by them - and it ended up being one that failed miserably.
I suspect the current issue over in Redmond is the same decision makers are still in charge, and they haven't wrapped their brains around what a colo
Re:Improved tablets (Score:4, Insightful)
Let me rephrase what you said in a way that fits my view.
Microsoft missed the mark because they tried to make a tablet a laptop light instead of a fundamentally different beast. They didn't redesign the UI to work better with a finger based input. Instead they put a layer on top of a keyboard/mouse based OS and made you move a mouse around with your finger, thus making it cumbersome and lame. /rephrasing
What gets me though is how much people fail to realize the simple truth of a tablet, namely that a tablet's killer app is the internet. If you want to do real work, play games, type something, you want a laptop/desktop. If you're watching TV or movie, you want a TV. If you want to use the internet, something that is heavy on reading, watching and clicking but very light on typing, it's perfect for a tablet. I think MS made a big mistake in not also recognizing this and building their UI and OS around this fact.
d
The one single thing wrong with tablets (Score:3)
The one single thing wrong with tablets is - everyone knows what happens to a transparent surface when it's left open to the elements. It gets pitted, scratched, and ugly.
There may be materials that get past that, but that's the perception, folks. They need a cover.
They need to be isolated from dirty fingers, stray noodles, micrometeorites and orbital meatball impacts. Until the public thinks of clear screens as unbreakable, they'll need to think of them as disposable. That may be ideal from a suppli
Re:Improved tablets (Score:4, Funny)
Insightful is the new Funny, because Funny gets you no Karma.
This was decided years ago, by people not you.
Hope this helps.
--
BMO
I'm undoing a moderation by posting this.
By using 'Insightful' instead of 'Funny' you are changing the tone of the post. The 'karma' they earn doesn't really buy them anything useful, but it does create confusion. The 'not-us' people who decided this were being thoughtless. STOP IT.
Re:Improved tablets (Score:5, Insightful)
Mod parent down, then mod this funny.
Re:Improved tablets (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
It's time for the wiki on slashdot include such pertinent items as karma and moderation. But don't launch it on April 1 FTLOG!
non-fat wiki on slashdot can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slashdot [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The best humor always has a grain of truth behind it. The originating post was funny on multiple levels, and insightful. It wasn't a fart joke. Rather it even brought up (sarcastically) the issue of patents, which made it funnier.
Modding insightful is justified.
*looks at your UID*
Get off my lawn. Don't tell me how to mod posts, kid.
--
BMO
Re:Improved tablets (Score:5, Insightful)
My idea of an "improved tablet" is something that I can treat like a PC and be in full control over.
I can print from it without any nonsense.
I can move files on and off of it without any nonsense.
I can run whatever apps I want without any nonsense.
Plus, sometimes a puny SSD just doesn't cut it.
My "improved tablet" (Score:5, Interesting)
My idea of an "improved tablet" is one on which web sites cannot distinguish the fact that I'm accessing it on a tablet so that I won't get any more "We're sorry, but we don't have the content rights to display this on mobile devices" messages. Until that happens, I will always consider a tablet as a deliberately gimped PC. (That is typically actually more expensive than a PC.)
Re:My "improved tablet" (Score:4, Informative)
The new paywall-enabled New York Times site for one. It charges differentially depend on how it's being accessed. Tablet access costs $5 more per month than does access from a mobile phone.
Bigger screen = Easier to read = Costs more
Re: (Score:3)
In addition, for a total business solution tablet system I want all those AND:
Wrapped in a nice leather day planner
A full color high performance touch screen on the left (near 8x11 size)
An E-Ink display on the right (near 8x11 size) that can take stylus input.
Integrated extended/replacable battery in the spine
USB and HDMI connections (in and out)
I want to be able to take it to presentations and plug into the projector while taking notes. I want to be able to review spec docs while flying to project sites. I
Re:Improved tablets (Score:5, Insightful)
My idea of an "improved tablet" is something that I can treat like a PC and be in full control over.
I can print from it without any nonsense.
I can move files on and off of it without any nonsense.
I can run whatever apps I want without any nonsense.
Plus, sometimes a puny SSD just doesn't cut it.
How many TabletPCs did you end up buying over the last 7 years?
Re:Improved tablets (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Improved tablets (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't think "tablets" are going to die outright, but I do think they're a passing fad (much in the same way as most things, including the "HPCs" in the early 2000s or Palms or anything else leading up to now).
Basically, like the netbook, they're a stepping stone.
Netbooks proved that such a small, mobile - yet featureful - platform was possible. Tablets are now proving that the touchscreen UI is possible to maintain and useful to people (or, at least, we'll see that in a financial quarter or two, I suspect). Smartphones are doing the same thing too, really: the only difference is porn and other movies are better on your tablet. :P
Personally, I think we're about 2-5 years away from a 'device convergence'. We've got the smartphones, tablets, netbooks, desktops, etc. - and we've got a number of devices which play between the lines (Google's 'laptop', thinclients, tablets with attachable keyboards, etc.)
How long until we're seeing a "computer" for sale from a major manufacturer which is fully componentized for modular use? By that I mean something like:
* at its most reduced, it's a smartphone.
* it can be inserted into the back of a larger display, making it a tablet
* it can then be clipped to a keyboard chassis and used as a netbook
* it can be dropped in a station, giving it discreet graphics, added storage and more RAM - allowing your contacts, games, etc. to still be available and playable on a "different device/platform".
Honestly, I suspect Apple is moving this direction right now, with the rumor that OSX is on its last legs, the popularity of games on Apple's store, and so on. Each of these things have been more-or-less implemented, by one hardware manufacturer or another, in the past couple of years on their own (dual video chips on Lenovo laptops, the detachable/clip screens on a couple netbooks, the perpetual 'laptop dock', etc.) and improvements in x86-64 mobile processors/architecture/bios makes such a prospect all the more realizable. If a company were to mass-produce such a 'platform' I have no doubt it'd be immensely popular with geeks ("we can put windows/os x/linux/android on it") and consumers ('ooo another apple product') alike.
Re:Improved tablets (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Well, you can buy those running Windows now. Or buy them and run Linux. Whatever.
Tablets existed LONG before Apple. They even ran Windows. Post-iPAD tablets are released all the time. You want rugged? Its there. You want built-in bar code scanners? There. Digitizers instead of touch? Yup, you can get them. Digitizers AND touch? EEE has one coming.
Win7 runs like a champ on them, especially if they are pen and not touch based. Touch works, but nevermind that touch-based PCs have been around for ages (HP sells
Re: (Score:3)
How about a three-digit Slashdot nerd who told them he wanted one?
Too late to patent, many to buy (Score:3, Informative)
What I would like to see is a tablet with an attached keyboard. Let's say, a device where the tablet and keyboard are joined by a hinge, so that it can be closed while not in use.
Too late to patent since you can already buy any number [tcgeeks.com] of keyboard cases for the iPad.
What do they all have in common? They join the tablet with a keyboard in a case you can close.
Only with these you have the option to take just the screen with you if you like, unlike the ancient inflexible devices known as "laptops".
Re: (Score:3)
Did netbooks go somewhere...?
Last time I looked the shops were full of them
Re: (Score:3)
Netbook: Desktop, you're nice.
Desktop: Thanks, you're nice too.
Re:Improved tablets (Score:4, Interesting)
Any entrenched market leader will always claim anything different and competitive is a fad. Travel by train was supplanted by air travel. That was claimed to be a fad. The horse and buggy businesses claimed the automobile was a fad. Radio claimed TV was a fad. The Bells all claimed the cellphone was a fad. Now the company entrenched as the market leader for operating systems for computers is claiming the same of tablets (of which they have nearly no offerings). I'm sure they are watching the market for tablets pass by as companies swerve to avoid their OS on that platform (I seriously hope we don't get trapped by vendor lock-in the way we have with the Windows platform). The fact of the matter is, just because Microsoft can't make a tablet OS that anyone wants doesn't mean that the market for these devices won't exist for a very long time and have significant utility.
The problem with tablets is that everyone wants one but no one can afford them. The Apple product is far too restrictive and the price is very high over the long haul, being consumers are locked into their Apple walled garden (similar to cell phone contracts--phones are cheap but when combined with contracts the cost is exorbitant). Tablet PCs are significantly cheaper to "design" than PCs once you have your first model. Anything after that is incredibly inexpensive as the thermal design set, the engineering and art are complete. Right now the tablet market is trying to suck as much money out everyone for a series of products that will be incredibly cheap in the future even though it's extremely cheap for them to design and build them today.
Re: (Score:3)
I realize this is a joke, but...
Tablets like the iPad are great for casual computing.
Some examples of casual computing:
- Checking how your stocks are doing
- Randomly looking up something on Wikipedia to settle an argument with your friend/spouse while sitting on the couch watching a movie
- "Oh I should show you those photos!"
- Catching up on the latest news while still lying in bed in the morning
In all these situations, it's easier to grab a tablet, push a button to turn it on, and have it immediately avail
Re: (Score:3)
2) Done. There are keyboards for iPads and Android tables. They often come integrated onto a tablet case so that it is hinged just like a laptop.
3) A strange requirement. If the tablet can BE a comparable laptop, why would you pay even on penny more for a device that is locked into lap
Then go buy your iPad (Score:3)
1) You can print to a wifi printer (I think some apps are starting to get there.)
1) iOS from 4.1 on I believe, supports printing to a variety of printers, system wide (the app itself can offer printing or you can just take a screen grab and print that). Pretty much all document and note apps on the iPad support printing.
I have a $80 HP printer that's only hooked up over WiFi and the iPad prints to it just fine, with no fuss. There's no setup, it just sees whatever printers are on the network.
2) You can ge
well, he might be right (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:well, he might be right (Score:5, Insightful)
Netbooks crashed primarily because of MS and the manufacturers got featuritis. Netbooks aren't really sold anymore, I'm not really sure that there is a lack of demand, but as long as nobody is selling a cheap, ultramobile device, it's really hard for demand to develop and be sustained.
I've got an Asus netbook, and apart from the battery life, I love the thing, it's big enough to type on, but small enough to be readily portable. But, then again, it doesn't run Windows, and MS expects to get a share of any netbook sales.
Other theories (Score:4, Insightful)
Netbooks crashed primarily because of MS and the manufacturers got featuritis.
Of course it's totally a coincidence the Netbook market dies around the same time the iPad was released.
No relation here, no-sir.
Re:Other theories (Score:5, Interesting)
Agree. A netbook (there are two in this house) (Score:4, Insightful)
is a "laptop lite" and for us the primary selling point was in fact the sub-$200 price. It's a Damned Cheap Computer and that's why you buy one—because they're essentially disposable laptops but with adequate performance for most uses. Then you don't mind tossing them in a bag, taking them to the beach, using them on bouncy train rides with the screen hinge flopping, etc.
They can be used in all the places you don't want to risk your much more expensive laptop, and the small size that the constraint of small price imposed was just a bonus. No way I'd pay $300+ for a netbook, but our second netbook was recently acquired on eBay for $75. We didn't mind that it only had a sub-Ghz celeron processor, 512MB of memory, and a smallish hard drive. It runs the latest web browsers fine, and that's all that matters.
Re:Other theories (Score:4, Interesting)
Are you suggesting that software played no part in it?
Linux on the tablet was popular early on, but by the time the iPad came to market, Microsoft owned virtually all the netbook market. Say what you want about Windows, but it was never designed for a small device. The Linux-based ones were at least trying different things. Then came the iPad with an operating system that was designed specifically for the form factor which housed it.
As good as Apple's marketing is, people generally do not choose Apple over Microsoft when it comes to general purpose computers. The iPad had to be something special to pull people away from their Windows-running Netbooks. If the Netbook players would have designed an OS specifically for the Netbook form, I am thinking the outcome may have been different. The iPad still would have been successful, but perhaps the Netbook would have remained a player.
Re: (Score:3)
I agree with your line of thought, but it seems like even had more netbook makers stuck with Linux it still would have been a hard matchup against the iPad which was a more polished Windows alternative on a small device.
I'm not even saying the iPad was the only factor, just that I think it was a factor. Going back to your point I think one of the reasons why netbook makers moved away from Linux is because they wanted something more polished to compete against the iPad and the only thing they could think of
Microsoft's netbook strategy (Score:5, Insightful)
Asian manufacturers like Acer and ASUS starting releasing netbooks with versions of Linux on them because it wasn't possible to run Vista effectively on machines with first-generation Atom processors. They couldn't install WinXP on those machines because it had already reached its end-of-life, and MS wanted everyone to move to Vista. MS's partners like Dell and HP wanted nothing to do with netbooks because they feared, rightly I suspect, that these devices would erode the market for their more powerful laptops.
All that changed the day MS decided to extend WinXP licensing solely for netbooks. To protect its partners, MS imposed strict limitations on this license. "Netbooks" were defined by the screen size and limited to 1 GB of memory. Bigger screens or more memory meant no WinXP. Since Microsoft knew it was competing against a product that was free-of-charge, it dropped its OEM price for WinXP on qualifying netbooks to a mere $15 per copy [techreport.com], compared to four or five times that figure for OEM copies of Windows on laptop and desktop machines. Later they developed the crippled "Starter Edition" of Windows 7 to serve the same market and again charged hardly anything for it. It doesn't require a conspiracy theorist to see that these strategies were designed entirely to keep Linux off machines that might end up in the hands of ordinary people.
Well you can imagine what happened after that. The Dells and HPs of the world saw there was a demand for netbooks and began competing with the Acers of the world. People who wandered into Staples or BestBuy suddenly saw small form-factor devices with friendly old XP on them competing with systems offering some flavor of Linux with an unfamiliar UI. Guess which ones sold? Guess which OS comes with netbooks from Acer and ASUS these days?
Nowadays netbooks have 10" and 12" screens and often 2GB of memory. Which operating system are they running? Usually Win7 Home Premium. How much does it cost the OEMs to license that OS? A lot more than $15/copy I'm sure. The higher license fee pushed up the price of netbooks so they're no longer so price-competitive compared to low-end laptops. Dell and HP breathed a sigh of relief.
All this happened years before anyone ever touched an iPad.
Re:Other theories (Score:5, Insightful)
LoB
Re:Other theories (Score:4, Funny)
Yes, but that will change next year when you return home from the polar research station.
Re: (Score:3)
This is totally anecdotal and informal: I was on a flight last week from the west coast. When I walked back to go to the bathroom, I saw more people using iPads than laptops.* Also, no one in senior management at my company carries a laptop anymore (and they all used to carry laptops just slightly larger than would be classified as netbooks) -- they all carry iPads now.
*Eventually, I expect I will be writing such a sentence using "media tablet" in place of "iPad", but for now they really all did have iPa
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
HP dmz1 I believe is basically a netbook. Uses the AMD Fusion processor.
I have one of these, and I love it. It cost less than half what my brother paid for his Envy 14, and it does almost everything I want it to while I'm on the bus or traveling around. 3.5 pounds, 11.6-inch screen, surprisingly comfortable keyboard, all for around $400.
IMO the real reason netbooks have lost is because Atom sucks so hard that it needs separate dedicated hardware to even play HD video. Netbooks were being compared to real computers, and kept coming up short. The new AMD Zacate-based netbooks (or
Re:well, he might be right (Score:5, Insightful)
Netbooks are laptops with a smaller form factor.
Tablets are smart phones in a bigger form factor.
It appears that size does matter, but in what context is anyone's guess.
Re: (Score:3)
The iPad is an upscaled iPod Touch with two really big batteries and a bigger screen. (Take a look at the pictures of a disassembled iPad if you don't believe me.)
Most other tablets are just flat netbooks with a touchscreen instead of a keyboard.
Re:well, he might be right (Score:5, Insightful)
The reason why Tablets failed before was that they simply didn't make sense. The OS was terrible (Windows lolwat?), the hardware was big and bulky, the battery life was scary, and the touch screens weren't responsive. Contrast everything I just said with a iPad 2011.
I think dedicated eBook Readers will die. Laptops and Netbooks will continue to merge closer and closer. Tablets and Phones might also merge even more. Ultimately however I think touch screen devices of some form-factor will survive.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Netbooks were killed by the simple fact that I can now get a full-size notebook for $350, so why would I want a DVD-less netbook for the same price?
B/C cost is not always the sole selling point for everyones needs.
Re: (Score:3)
Dedicated eBook Readers serve a purpose that no other device can match, due to their e-ink screens (way easier on the eyes, especially in poor light, and uses hardly any battery power). Unless tablet makers figure out how to have a regular tablet screen that can also become an e-ink screen when needed, I don't see tablets wiping out eBook Readers anytime.
Tablets, on the other hand, well, I haven't quite figured out yet what purpose they serve. I've seen them used in certain business settings (hospitals, for
Re:well, he might be right (Score:5, Insightful)
Only because no one sells them anymore. They kept getting bigger and added spinning disks. I love my dell mini 9, but have no idea what to replace it with other than maybe a macbook air. I am going to be wiping the OS no matter what route I go. I want light, small, and do not want any moving parts. I will use it attached to a real monitor and real keyboard when at work and do any and all heavy lifting on servers.
Re: (Score:3)
Agreed (Score:5, Funny)
Wholeheartedly Agree with Microsoft.
I now fear comment retribution..
Re: (Score:2)
nahhhh
Tablets are fun and cool (if done well) but they have yet to prove their usefulness.
When or if they do that then we can agree that the form factor is here to stay
Re:Agreed (Score:5, Interesting)
Android and iOS are coming for Microsoft,and their monopoly profits like twin freight trains. Of course, when you're paid to ignore reality...
I think I remember... (Score:4, Insightful)
Looking at windows phone 7 & the x-box (kinect), the company can execute well, but they really need some vision for future markets to get ahead of the curve. Seriously, 18 months ago WP7 would have crushed android. Now? Nothing.
Re:I think I remember... (Score:4, Interesting)
Actually a better paralle was Digital Equipment Corp. When micro computers started to become popular DEC just didn't see the point. The would rather make real profits selling minicomputers. People where still paying big bucks for PDP-11s DEC System 20s and the hot new VAX. By the time DEC produced the Rainbow it was too little too late. Microsoft looks to be in the same mindset.
I wounder how Microsoft will feel when RIM buys them and then HP buys RIM?
An Imitator, not an Invovator (Score:5, Insightful)
How can anyone take what Microsoft says seriously?
They keep trying to barge into everyone's market and often fail, largely because they just don't get it - they don't understand the market, the product or the customers, but march in with their own Microsoft Brand and PR bandwagon going full-tilt, withdrawing quietly after a few years of marginal success or outright failure.
XBox is about the only thing they have going, but that didn't come cheaply and the one thing I know from decades as a video gamer - gamers are NOT loyal - as soon as a newer, better game shows up they're off to that platform and the old one is pushed to the back of the closet or flogged on eBay for what they can get.
Take away the revenues generated by The Windows Tax, Office software and Servers and they'd have gone bust a decade ago, with all the other phonus balonus dot coms and all their hubris about reshaping the world.
The one innovation which eludes Microsoft is getting their operating system off the home-brew legacy throttled model it has always been on. It may look glossy, but it's a cow, with security holes galore and all the important things users need to know safely buried in obscurity. At least Apple realized Mac OS was becoming a painfully large snowball to support and switched to a better model. The next version of Windows will again be completely unnecessary and try to copy everything Google has been doing, which will make it a real pain for desktop apps.
Wait wait... "go the way of the netbook" (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Wait wait... "go the way of the netbook" (Score:4, Informative)
I think that "go the way of the netbook" might also refer to the razor thin margins on netbooks. Not a very profitable market to be in.
Fighting for the scraps in a race to the bottom is unlikely to be a winning strategy.
Re: (Score:3)
netbooks may have not gone anywhere, but sales of netbooks certainly did. Anyone who wants one, already bought one; new ones don't do anything that the one they already have does, so there's no reason to upgrade unless you smash the one you have.
Possibly correct (Score:5, Interesting)
He is possibly correct.
Meanwhile, some others (notably Apple) are riding that bubble like the silver surfer and making money by the crate load.
So Microsoft's goal is NOT to make money from new tech?
Even if it is a bubble Microsoft shows its corporate vision (or lack thereof) in this.
Kind of sad because this is the same company that made the Kinect not so long ago, showing that not everybody at Microsoft lacks vision.
Re: (Score:3)
Microsoft's myopia was even evident in the Kinect - that it was a gaming only device and should "never be connected to a real computer"
They very nearly went the way of Sony in this regard, but eventually saw the light.
--
BMO
Re:Possibly correct (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Possibly correct (Score:5, Informative)
Well if Mundie is correct, then his company spent the last ten years or so blowing their money on making a fad product. People seem to forget that Bill Gates himself championed their use. You can get a Windows tablet today probably. What Mundie really means to say is that Apple's vision of a tablet (which is different than MS) is a fad.
Really it sounds like sour grapes. Since 2001, MS has been trying to sell tablets. Tablets were slightly modified laptops with a stylus pen and a touch screen instead of a mouse. They never sold very well due to many factors. They were more expensive than laptops. MS never really optimized their OS for touch. They just swapped out the mouse for the stylus and called it done. They however would run Windows apps but offered few advantages over a cheaper laptop.
So here comes Apple with their tablet. Really, the iPad is just a giant iPod Touch. What MS never understood is that is what consumers wanted in a tablet. If consumers wanted laptop functionality they would have bought a laptop. What consumers wanted was a portable way of web surfing, email, etc. The laptop or MS tablet or smart phone were the only devices available. When Apple gives them another option, consumers responded and in 6 months, Apple sold more tablets than MS did in 9 years. That must burn MS.
Re:Possibly correct (Score:4, Insightful)
Surface, the Courier, Kinect (the full list is quite long)... they really do make some cool stuff, and often well ahead of the competition. It just seems like the suits there are actively doing everything they can to stop MS from actually bringing anything cool to market. Boggles the mind, really.
Re: (Score:3)
The Kinect is indeed a fad. I have one to my XBox which is now only used during parties. To accurately control a simplified interface to something it is too slow and unresponsive and gets tiring really quick. To pause hold your arm out for 5 seconds. To click go in the general area of the button and hold your arm for 2 seconds. Yeah, that will catch on real quick as an interface.
Their other invention they hope will catch on is the Surface tech which is basically turning your table into an oversized tablet,
Re:Possibly correct (Score:5, Interesting)
Objectively, a tablet is a laptop without a keyboard or the ability to do a lot of things laptops do, but with a higher price tag. The only reason to own one is that they're fashionable and hip.
Your comments betray either a strong anti-apple bias, or a complete lack of imagination. Aside from reading ebooks, there are a lot of other tasks a tablet is more suited to by virtue of its form factor, smaller-size, longer battery life, etc.
For example, when we go on long car trips, my kids and I can play board games by passing the iPad around to who's turn it is. And we can use it solidly for hours. Also, I like to play tabletop war games (warhammer 40k, etc). I have all of the rules on the pad where its form factor for this task is so much more usable than a laptop is.
Re: (Score:3)
. The only reason to own one is that they're fashionable and hip.
Are we as technologist still throwing out this meme?
I don't have an iPad 1 but a large number of competent software engineers, hardware designers, and system administrators (including Linux and Win systems) I know do. They aren't hipsters but find the device very useful in a number of ways.
I had the good fortune of having one loaned to me for a couple of weekends and was hooked. There was something very nice about leaving my Mac laptop connected to my big screen and reference speakers while I was working
Just like that whole "Internet" fad too... (Score:4, Insightful)
It took until Windows 95 until Microsoft decided that the whole "Internet fad" thing perhaps, just maybe had some legs.... meanwhile, many techies had been on the Internet since 1988 and on the World Wide Web since 1993.
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft was an early adopter... (Score:3)
It's not like the tablet fad caught Microsoft completely by surprise:
Bill Gates unveils Microsoft's new Tablet PC in 2002 [upi.com]
And as for the internet thing, what you really mean is: Microsoft didn't get into the World Wide Web until 1995. This isn't terribly surprising, since the WWW hadn't been around yet when windows 3.1 was released. At the time, the WWW was one of several possible futures. The one MS first wanted to bet on was the 'Microsoft Network'. Of course, that's not the path history ended up taking, s
They can't compete (Score:5, Insightful)
It should be obvious by now that Microsoft is incapable of competing with Android and iOS whether on the phone or the tablet. Much less get into the game with something great enough it makes up for their tardiness.
The only strategy left is to hope it all goes away soon, and denegrating that part of the market is the only commentary they can make to help that along.
Look on the bright side MS, at least the standalone digital music player market is shrinking.
Re: (Score:3)
Kinda reminds me of Gates dismissing the Internet as a passing fad, and refusing to put a TCP/IP stack in Windows 3.1. He bet on subscription-based walled gardens like AOL and CompuServe, setting up MSN based on that model.
my old style tablet is better (Score:2)
just sad really (Score:2)
I don't have a keyboard-free laptop and don't plan to get one, but this is just sad really. What self-respecting company would pass up the chance to over-charge gullible consumers and make bazillions of dollars? It makes me wonder if M$ might be entering some long, slow death spiral. I'm imagining they have been entirely drained of all the dynamic, daring innovators who all defected to Google and Facebook and the only employees left are the boring, fearful, lifer types who just want to keep punching the cl
Re: (Score:3)
There's a big difference between abandoning a crowded market with meager margins and reaping enormous revenues from a product with outrageous margins like the iPad. Additionally, the hardware is only half the story. The iPad is not so much about the hardware as about the app and media purchasing ecosystem that it provides access to. Apple is the largest music retailer in the world, and collects about 30% of every dollar paid for songs, movies, and applications in this application and media ecosystem. It's
Now he's done it... (Score:5, Insightful)
Now that somebody at Microsoft has said tablets are a fad, they're going to be around forever.
Here is a Microsoft prediction to real-life consequence translation table:
X is a fad = X is going to be a fixture in the future of computer technology
X ought to be enough for everyone = X is going to look very insignificant very fast
X infinges on our patents = X is a major threat to us
X (said 36 times in a row) = X is going to start migrating away from us
Agreed *cough* (Score:5, Funny)
I think there is a world market for maybe five tablets.
Hello? (Score:3)
MS Hardware (Score:4, Insightful)
I agree (Score:5, Interesting)
Microsoft failed with their tablets... twice... (Score:2, Insightful)
They failed with their tablets ~10 years ago...
They failed again with their tablets a few years ago then they attached legs to them and failed to sell them as tables...
Microsoft should stick to defending their monopoly and destruction of other companies (Nokia)... It's the only thing they're good at...
Wat (Score:5, Insightful)
Microsoft effectively killed the netbook when they quit releasing versions of XP and forced everyone to move to Windows 7, which had higher memory and drive requirements. By the time you were done with a system that could run Windows 7 well, it wasn't that much cheaper than a regular laptop.
Tablets don't need to run a Microsoft OS. Apple and Google (and now Amazon) are showing you don't need to have a local PC to do most of the work you do with smartphones and tablets.
Re: (Score:3)
You'll also notice that Windows-based netbooks are dying, but the market niche they abandoned when they switched to Windows - a simplified device which runs just a few core apps like browser, email, video/music player,
We will never need more than 640k or the Net (Score:2)
Obviously, we will never need more than 640k (he says as he types on a 1000 Gbps line, not using his quad-core machine with 8GB DDR3) and the Net is a fad too.
Here's a clue stick - Government Computer News shows about half of all government devices purchased are expected to be tablets like the iPad, iPad2, and iPad3.
Adapt or die.
No surprise (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm guessing it's because Microsoft doesn't have a touch-based UI for Windows that they're saying tablets are a fad. They thought the same about the internet and portable mp3 players too. Yes, they had tablet PC's long before others but it was a barely-modified version of XP that simply replaced a mouse with a stylus - it wasn't the same.
They'll get into the market as soon as they can cobble together a "good enough" touch-based UI for Windows and then leave it about 5 years later when they realize they aren't making any headway against already well-entrenched Android and iOS markets.
The Microsoft-dominated era is over unless they can figure out a way to execute at least as well as their rivals.
Hasn't MS been chasing this fad for ~10 Years? (Score:5, Insightful)
This seems odd, since Microsoft has been trying to get people into tablets for about 10 years. UMPC/Slates/Etc. I remember this was a keynote item for Bill Gates.
Now someone else actually makes a success out of it, and it's a fad?
That seems like the very definition of sour grapes.
Wait. What? (Score:5, Informative)
Netbooks are fad?
I still use mine all the time.
Or maybe just MS netbooks were fads? Mine runs Linux.
[enjoy warm, smug glow]
The Problem with Netbooks is (Score:3)
that they are not getting better. The new Atoms are just as underpowered as the old ones. They lack most of the features of a modern CPU. They still have no gigabit ethernet, no USB3, no eSATA, no decent horizontal resolution. And Windows 7 Starter is even worse than Windows XP Home.
As a consequence, everybody who wanted a netbook has one, but there is no incentive to upgrade. They will sell again once they get better.
let me guess how this is going to work... (Score:5, Insightful)
If you look back at MS's history, they generally try to downplay any new innovation they aren't actively in the market with. Smartphones, music players, tablet PCs, etc.
They don't have a tablet (at least not for sale or for show) so they're going to call it a "fad" and hope that keeps buyers from getting one and getting branded on it.
In the meanwhile their R&D department will be mad busy with their photocopiers, trying to make an "improved variation" on whatever they're labeling as a fad. No one believes them, but they're convinced that by simply making the statement, that somehow everyone will believe them and not create a market for the product, giving them time to scramble and rush something out the door in time to catch the wave.
18 months later they will suddenly stop calling it a fad and announce their new product, with surprisingly familiar looking features, plus a ton of additional bloat. Many months later, after delays, price increases, even more bloat, and cutting of key features that were pushed hard in the initial announcement, product will hit the stores. MS will announces this new product will "revolutionize" the market.
Despite outrageous amounts of funding and marketing, it will still bomb because the market has already been captured several years ago by what they were unsuccessful at downplaying as a "fad", it doesn't work like consumers are now expecting it to (even if some features may even work better than their ancestor in the market), is clumsy to use, and few will buy it.
After losing their shirts in a spectacular show of bad retail, someone will then get a clue and less than 6 months after product launch, an announcement will be made that the product has been discontinued. No official numbers will be given as to how much the fiasco cost the company, but inside sources will whisper tales of massive financial loss.
I believe the same was send about the ipod (Score:3)
The truth of the matter is that Microsoft can not make an ipad-like object without screwing it up in someway.
(Either marketing, pricing, licensing, or bad design)
It takes vision that spans all 4 of these areas.
And they know it. They are completely relegated to XBOX and MS Word.
Re: (Score:3)
...because, as we all know, there is NO market for MP3 players.
At least not for brown ones
The Zune wasn't really bad (it wasn't that good either) but the early defining feature seemed to be the fecal color... that seemed to stick in people's minds.
Re: (Score:3)
More features != better.
Apple learned that lesson. MS still hasn't.
Re:Oh Microsoft, there you go again... (Score:4, Insightful)
More features usually means less well developed features which means worse.
Just bullet points are NEVER a consideration for better.
Apple takes it's time to develop the next generation of features well. Most/all other companies just don't get that.
Re: (Score:2)
Not only will they be smaller, but I believe they'll incorporate some kind of functionality that will allow them to replace the telephone as well.
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe but I don't think so, for a simple practical reason. A centre of a large, wall-mounted screen will be above your eyes. This is indescribably uncomfortable for anything that isn't basically vegging out in front of a TV.
Re: (Score:3)
There are two Zombie Technologies that will Just Not Die at Microsoft:
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I think Tablets aren't going to last (people will get tired of carrying around something that large just like they don't want to tote around laptops everywhere), but I don't think 'full featured' tablets are the future.
For one, we've *had* laptop replacement tablets for a while as a niche market. It has failed to never get out of the gate I think that's enough information to suggest that it's a dead end. I don't think 4GB is particularly out of reach for tablets, but it's also more than the common user ne