
Microsoft Expected to Introduce Tablet - ttunguz
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/16/technology/microsoft-expected-to-introduce-tablet.html?_r=1&ref=technology
======
raganwald
This feels like PowerPoint-driven strategy. All of the executives in Microsoft
are like circling vultures, fighting with each other over the flesh of the
Windows cash flow stream, trying to get their organizations funded.

You’d think they could just leave and found their own companies, but no,
they’d have to make something people wanted relatively immediately, instead of
being able to mouth platitudes about being “strategic” and “building moats” to
“protect” Windows and so on and so forth.

Or if you prefer, there is a Windows Tax, and these divisions are like
government projects, each trying to justify their existence and draw upon the
tax revenues. Like government projects, they are not accountable to the people
who pay the taxes, just faceless mandarins at the top.They only lose if they
are silly enough to cause a scandal with their foolishness and embarrass the
company into firing them and defunding their projects.

Building Kin, then killing it, then getting into bed with Nokia, then building
their own tablet... Reminds me of the way the city contractors tear up my
street, then pave it, then tear it up again, then pave it again, and so forth.
As long as the bureaucracy is in control, and as long as the tax dollars keep
flowing, it’s a game of who has the best PowerPoint.

~~~
brudgers
Because Gates managed to more or less bootstrap Microsoft, he and Ballmer have
maintained a significant degree of control. This allows them to orient the
company toward the long term, rather than chasing this quarter's advice from
Wall Street analysts.

Microsoft has always approached relationships with a B2B strategy - the _mea
culpa_ following the red ring of death shows the way in which that culture
extends into the consumer side of the equation. Management's job is to make
sure that there are dividends going to all those pension funds which own their
stock, not to entertain bloggers.

If Microsoft is actually releasing their own tablet hardware as a long term
strategy for extending an existing franchise (such as Xbox), it's probably
because their is little interest in Windows Tablets from existing hardware
manufacturers. Releasing their own hardware also brings the Windows RT
restrictions regarding BIOS into a sensible light - not that dearth of
consumer interest in Linux tablets made all the whining sensible.

I suspect that Microsoft has looked at the existing tablet landscape and sized
it up pretty accurately as people want eReaders and iPads, and believe that
the best way to expand the market is to get telemetry on how tablets are
actually used.

Unlike your local paving company, Microsoft is gambling their own money, not
driving up profits by looking for change orders.

~~~
wittjeff
> If Microsoft is actually releasing their own tablet hardware as a long term
> strategy for extending an existing franchise (such as Xbox), it's probably
> because their is little interest in Windows Tablets from existing hardware
> manufacturers.

Current Windows tablet makers may infer that investing money on Windows 8
tablets is as likely to pay off as the last round. The story there is similar
to the iPod natural monopoly -- no one made any money on any of those cheaper-
but-not-cheap-enough hard-drive-based portable music players. What is needed
is an optimal hardware+software combo, plus a different business model.
Following Amazon's lead, it might make sense to sell a Win8 tablet at cost and
make the profit on cloud-based subscription services.

~~~
brudgers
Who is in a position to follow Amazon's lead? The list of hardware
manufacturer's is pretty short: Sony. Given the existence of a Games Hub
focused on Xbox Live, even that seems somewhat problematic.

The second thing I see is that the idea of a media consumption device is
somewhat antithetical to Microsoft's culture of treating computing devices as
computing devices. Going to the roots of the Courier concept, it was about
productivity not entertainment and Microsoft traditionally pushed productivity
applications down onto mobile devices as a matter of course - I wouldn't be
surprised to see Office on any tablet they provide.

Finally, one of the Metro red threads is that devices are occasionally
connected, not permanently connected to the cloud like Chromium.

------
brudgers
Microsoft has been looking at making a tablet since the Courier which was
previewed in the run up to Apple's release of the iPad. What their ultimate
strategy is remains to be seen but my guess is that if they are branding and
distributing the hardware it's as a result of lackluster interest among
consumer electronics companies in manufacturing such a device.

Such disinterest, if it is the case, isn't particularly surprising given the
consumer market's acceptance of Android driven tablets, and it may be
reasonable to see Microsoft choosing to take on the hardware side for the sake
of conducting research (ala' KIN).

Alternatively, a Windows 8 tablet under the XBox brand makes a lot of sense
given the success of that franchise and the level of acceptance that console
competitors have achieved with portable gaming devices...e.g. Gameboy and PSP.
A gaming focused marketing strategy has a lot going for it - "Mom, I can even
do my homework on it because it comes with Word" and integration with XBox
Live is already part of the Windows Phone 7 Gaming Hub.

I suspect that a gaming focused device would match up pretty well against the
iPad (and Android) because XNA offers a way of facilitating cross platform
development. On a larger front, integration of a tablet with Kinnect would
offer the potential for some really interesting applications out in the
workplace.

------
davidacoder
I bet this is the mysterious project Dave Cutler has been working on lately!

[http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/microsoft-confirms-
dave-...](http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/microsoft-confirms-dave-cutler-
father-of-windows-nt-now-working-on-xbox/11684)

~~~
Splines
Speaking of Cutler, if you haven't read it, I highly recommend the book "Show
Stopper!", which describes the early days of Windows NT.

[http://www.amazon.com/Show-Stopper-Breakneck-Generation-
Micr...](http://www.amazon.com/Show-Stopper-Breakneck-Generation-
Microsoft/dp/0029356717)

------
greyman
I am looking forward to this. Currently, I am using my wife's iPad now and
then, and while the display and smoothness of interaction is top notch, I
can't say I like the operating system... iOS isn't bad as an application
launcher, but I find it too restricting for a tablet. I can't do basic things
like configure something like startup script for an app, forward the output of
one program to another one, etc. etc... While a lot of people seems to like
iOS, something like Windows with touch seems much more appealing to me.
Moreover, I could then have one system in both my PC and tablet, which is also
(at least theoretically) great.

I also own an iPhone, and there I think iOS is great, since I want my phone to
be an application console, and nothing more. But in tablet, I'd like it to be
more like a computer, so iOS is not adequate for me here.

~~~
mc32
I'll have to wait and see.

I'm wishing against hope that they'll bring to life some of the features in
the Courier concept: Infinite journal, clip and paste, touch+stylus (stylus
for writing ideographs --which are cumbersome by finger).

Dual screen? Maybe as an alternate model. One of the main ideas is that it
would not just be a presentation medium but also a production medium.

------
Zirro
Finally. One of the major reasons I use Apple-products today is that the
hardware and software works together out of the box, which creates the feeling
that they were made for each other.

With clunky PCs, I've never experienced that feeling. Hopefully Microsoft can
get it right this time, and make it feel like a quality product. While I enjoy
using my Apple devices a lot, they do need some competition to fuel
innovation.

If Microsoft manages to pull this off the right way, with a feeling of great
quality to it, I could even see myself buying one to try out Windows 8
properly.

~~~
astrodust
This would burn so many bridges with their hardware manufacturers that some
would defect and go with some other platform almost immediately.

Microsoft thinks they're the king of the hill with Windows but it wouldn't
take long for vendors to team up together and make Chrome OS, Android, or some
other Linux variant into a viable alternative.

All this alternate OS would have to do is everything that Windows XP does. The
number of Windows 7 specific applications is shockingly low.

~~~
axefrog
Disagree. The hardware manufacturers aren't exactly rolling in high quality
operating systems to choose from. What are their other choices? Linux. Many
will of course argue that Linux is great and is an obvious choice, which would
be a fair enough argument, but for the larger majority of the population who
know Windows and don't want to learn something new, the manufacturers will
need to stick with Windows or risk alienating those potential customers.

Also, the argument is predicated on the assumption that this is a zero sum
game. Microsoft's value proposition isn't suddenly going to be so amazing that
no consumer will purchase a non-Microsoft PC. In the same way, I find it
highly likely that if Apple's OS were available for licensing, a lot of PC
manufacturers would license it without regard for the fact that Apple's
hardware is probably superior.

~~~
astrodust
Microsoft's strength in the tablet space is anything but assured. People don't
use proprietary Windows applications on them. They're not expecting to run
high-end accounting packages or SQL Server or do .NET development.

It's not even clear what Microsoft's value proposition is in this new space.

If you look at applications on the iPad and Android, only a small portion of
them are what you might term conventional by desktop standards.

------
kloc
Designed by Microsoft and made by Nokia? This could be the very reason Nokia
opted for Windows phone than choosing Android.

~~~
mtgx
I think it's the other way around. MS partnered with Nokia, and then decided
Nokia could do a tablet for them, too.

------
DrJosiah
I thought folks already knew about this?

I know at least a few tech folks who have _seen_ the Microsoft tablet demo'd,
and been plied with free drinks to forget the experience.

I can't believe that me, a tech guy in Los Angeles, heard about this (and saw
a MSoftie in our shared office showing it to some folks) before people in NYC,
SV, or Seattle. Wow.

------
niels_olson
Where'd all the comments go today? Great articles, no commentary? Is everyone
on their way home from WWDC?

~~~
SquareWheel
I stopped reading at the second paragraph.

    
    
      Microsoft is about to concede that Apple may be onto something.
    

Microsoft has been wanting to do a tablet for a decade. It's not like Apple
invented the concept.

~~~
cryptoz
Maybe you should keep reading as you've completely misinterpreted the
sentence. The author is stating the Microsoft has spent a long time trying to
make a tablet by building software and leaving the hardware to others while
Apple builds both the software and the hardware. Then the author states that
maybe Microsoft is realizing they should build the hardware too.

------
wmf
They could call it the Zune tablet.

------
grecy
If this is true, is sounds a lot like Microsoft's foray into the portable
digital music player market.... It reeks of trying to play catchup, but not
quite ever getting there.

------
gfosco
Unless they have a screen that can rival the Retina, this is dead on arrival.

~~~
dman
What if its for 50 bucks and subsidized via ads? Or if it allows you to play
Xbox games remotely over the internet? Or if it has great handwriting
recognition? Or if you can program on it using any language you want?

~~~
gfosco
50 bucks and subsidized via ads? Then Microsoft loses an epic fortune and only
has users without money.

play Xbox games remotely over the internet? It's just unfeasible. Control
schemes on a tablet do not translate to console games.

great handwriting recognition? Then it's going to require a stylus, and many
won't care. Not a good enough feature... The world has largely moved on from
this desire.

program on it using any language you want? Lol! We're talking about Microsoft
here! It's going to be a WinRT walled garden!

~~~
cryptoz
You're missing the point that there isn't a _single_ point that will cause a
tablet to fail in the market. If it doesn't have a great screen, most people
won't care (AT ALL). Those who do care won't buy it.

If it doesn't have a great screen, costs a fortune, has no features and no
apps, _then_ it's DOA. Pointing to a single feature and saying "this is the
only thing the market cares about" is silly and rarely a useful metric to look
at.

~~~
gfosco
The dominating feature of a tablet is the screen. It's the largest component
of the design, and has the most impact on the experience. If there was a
_single_ point of failure, that's the one to bet on.

Android, likewise, has not been able to compete in the tablet market... even
less so after the Retina iPad. Apple has, unfortunately, set a very high mark
for competition.

I had just purchased an Asus eeePad Transformer Prime, the top of the line
Android tablet, right before the Retina iPad... I immediately sold it, for a
loss, and switched.

~~~
cryptoz
> The dominating feature of a tablet is the screen. It's the largest component
> of the design, and has the most impact on the experience. If there was a
> single point of failure, that's the one to bet on.

I disagree with all my heart, soul, brain and everything in the universe. The
dominating feature of a tablet is the software.

> Android, likewise, has not been able to compete in the tablet market..

[citation needed]. Android has been slow to pick up but is slowly commanding
more and more of the market. Android started from behind on tablets but is
working to catch up; i.e., they're competing.

> Apple has, unfortunately, set a very high mark for competition.

I would consider that fortunate, not unfortunate. When is a high bar for
competition a bad thing?!

> I had just purchased an Asus eeePad Transformer Prime, the top of the line
> Android tablet, right before the Retina iPad... I immediately sold it, for a
> loss, and switched.

That's fine. I find the screen to be the _least_ important part of a tablet.
I'd take 800x600 running Android _any day_ over a high res iPad. You and I are
different people with different preferences. The market is made up of many
people like us, and the tablets that fit the most of us the best will do the
best in the market. You cannot take your personal preference and impose it on
the market. You will be wrong.

~~~
gfosco
When your phone has 1280x720 native resolution, it's a little hard to accept
the same resolution on a tablet.

