

Ask HN: Why did Microsoft develop their own tablet? - icode

What do you think, why Microsoft will produce their own tablet? Because they think the other hardware manufacturers will not support windows or because they think the other manufacturers will not produce a good tablet? Or because they think the hardware itself will be the profitmaker?
======
simba-hiiipower
I think it all comes down to demand generation for Windows 8/RT and the
broader Microsoft ecosystem.

Case in point, Apple.. People don’t queue up for a launch waiting to get their
hands on iOS, they want the iPad! It’s the device that interests people and
gets them invested in an ecosystem, not the other way around. What Apple has
always had, and what seemingly all its competitors have lacked, is a focus on
developing and marketing products that people really, really want (and the
ability to actually do it). Doing so gives ultimate mindshare.. You may not
have an iPhone and may not even want one, but I’d bet you know more about it
and all its iOS goodness, than any other phone out there (bar the one in your
pocket, maybe); the average consumer certainly does and that alone provides
for a significant lift to Apple's ecosystem.

That’s what Microsoft wants, and why we have Surface. Windows Phone is awesome
(my opinion), but no one knows about it; the launch of the Nokia’s Lumia
phones are helping, but not really in a big enough way. Microsoft can’t let
that happen with Windows 8/RT tablets going up against the iPad; because, and
I think rightly so, they see that the market is heading towards convergence
between what we traditionally think of as PC’s and tablets/smartphones.

And I’d add that it’s certainly not about increased profitability here..
Microsoft’s margins are the highest in the industry and one of the highest of
any Fortune 500 company (Apple ranks 24th on the list by this measure) [1]. I
don’t think Microsoft wants to be in the hardware business, it wants to be in
the platform/ecosystem business, and part of that business is having devices
that drive adoption. Simply put, it’s about getting people to want a device, a
device that runs Windows.

[1]
[http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2012/perfo...](http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2012/performers/companies/profits/revenues.html)

------
anvandare
Disclaimer: I don't know what I'm talking about. :)

To go into full bombastic and Cassandra mode: the PC market is vaporizing.
People are now fully expecting to have a 24/7 connection to YouTube/Google
(Maps)/Wikipedia/Facebook/Hulu/What-have-you. They want media-
consumption/entertainment devices (Google's Chromebooks: just an internet
browsing device). Before, the only way to access those things was through the
home-kitchen-garden PC most people had: a bulky big thing sitting in some
corner of the living room or their bedroom. Then laptops became more popular
because you can move around with those (though they're still somewhat bulky
and cable-y). Then came smartphones and tablets and suddenly you have a light,
more portable entertainment device you can carry with you anywhere! Then of
course comes the question: why still have a computer in the first place if all
you're doing is easily replacable by shaking/tapping the screen? (Yes, for
gamers and workers alike, PC's are more than internet-devices and require
keyboard/mice-input that's better than a touchscreen, but they're a minority.)

The problem for Microsoft is, of course, that they're missing the boat. Ever
since that holy(?) union many aeons ago between the IBM PC and Microsoft, they
have been in 90%+ control of the market. That golden era is now at an end
since, in the coming years, most people will stop buying a PC and just go for
a tablet/smartphone option instead. Apple and Android (and a lot of others
with their own OS) have already colonized vast swaths of land in that New
World, and Microsoft is now in trouble: if the PC market is going to shrink
that means their total domination of that market (and all the benefits that
brings when developers want to build things) means less and less. While
they're sure to be in total control of heavy-duty-use-computers (that is,
computers intended for office work and gaming) for quite a while to come, that
means nothing if the future (kids who are growing up and will eventually join
the workforce) is being made in a non-Microsoft land. (The main reason why
Microsoft is so eager with its academic licenses and so little interested in
combatting OS piracy: if people are used to working with X, they'll want to
work with X. If the New World becomes the biggest (most profitable) World,
whoever's in control of that might one day launch a reverse-colonization of
the Old World of said heavy-duty-use-computers...)

None of what I'm saying is really new or shocking (or even correct?). So what
does this mean? It means that Microsoft has to focus on a future tablet-
dominated market, which means it has to bring out a new OS built/ready for
that (Windows 8). But there is no IBM with a PC (tablet) this time Microsoft
can hook on to and get a free ride to market domination, so they have to build
their own (which they now have) and pray that they can reverse the coming tide
that threatens to sweep them as it did IBM so long ago: into being just a huge
(but no longer dominating) software company that focuses on work applications.
Hopefully the market will stay shattered and no one can establish a quasi-
monopoly, since it seems to lead to lack of competition and thus lack of
innovation. In the Game of Software, you either innovate or you die. :)

(And now I'm going to click that button and see that in the time it took me to
write all that five other people have written the same in a more succinct and
funnier way, ah well!)

------
bdfh42
The problem with writing Operating Systems for general purpose hardware (such
as the PC) is that it is expected to work with just about any components - no
matter where they are sourced. Sure there are "reference" specs but at the end
of the day the OS has to make up for a lot and still try and shine.

The next generation of Windows is crucial to the success of MS long term.
Their OS must be seen to be not just relevant to the next generation of
hardware - but seen to shine in that role.

I think it is entirely sensible for MS to produce a new product that show the
world how they think things should be done - with complete control over every
aspect of the design. [has risk of course]

Other manufacturers (the traditional PC companies I suppose) will be free to
offer their hardware vision alongside the one from Microsoft.

------
johngalt
When I'm asked to spec out a new windows based PC, my users compare the price
to the Acer at Costco for $349. Then they compare it's performance to a $2200
MacBook Pro. Much of Apple's success is based on forcing good (if expensive)
choices. This is Microsoft trying to do the same.

------
teyc
If I were Microsoft, here might be some possible justifications that I would
use:

1\. Windows Phones - while competent, and people who use them like them, never
managed to make any impact in terms of marketshare or market buzz. This is
because Windows Phones is just one of many OSes handset makers - Samsung, HTC
etc - support. Therefore, there is not dedicated marketing to push it. Nokia,
who is now exclusively on WP, did a lot of marketing but still couldn't cut
through the noise. Microsoft has use use its clout to generate the necessary
buzz and excitement on Windows tablets or risk a 1% market share once again.
With Ballmer on stage, they are effectively signalling they are "all-in" with
the plan.

2\. Google has successfully kick started interest in Android through
developing Google Phone as a reference design for other phones to follow.
Otherwise, there will be an inevitable fragmentation of screen sizes,
capabilities and price points. By setting an "aspirational" target, other
manufacturers will be able to build Surface clones that customers can compare
against.

3\. The Surface is big on product bundling. It is no longer a pure tablet, and
the magnetic snap on keyboard is not an option, but rather part of the
product. This makes it easier to sell at a slightly higher price-point than an
iPad.

4\. The reference magnetic dock, and placement of USB points etc sets the
stage for all third party manufacturer of cases, speakers, etc in such a way
that kick starts the ecosystem.

5\. In the worst case where OEMs abandon manufacturing Windows slates,
Microsoft is able to ensure that their investment in Windows 8 isn't entirely
lost. They might turn this into a long term play just as they have with XBox.
Unit cost of slates are around the $250-mark at present. Microsoft could take
the ball home and do it all themselves if OEM find Windows slates difficult to
push into the market.

------
debacle
Honestly? Probably because they can't trust their hardware manufacturers on
quality, they can't innovate as fast as they want to with third party
manufacturers, and Steve Jobs taught them that hardware matters (more than
well engineered mice).

~~~
dengar007
I think you're dead-on. Windows 8 would get a bad rap because some vendor
installed it on crap hardware. I think MS releasing their own hardware is wise
-- it basically sets the bar for what a Windows 8 tablet should be.

------
brudgers
Microsoft has had an interest in producing tablets since they were working on
the Courier in the run-up to the iPad's release (and of course Surface itself
is related).

In the current market, tablets appear to be similar to game consoles -
consumers are willing to accept a closed ecosystem (e.g. iPad, Chromium,
Kindle). So Microsoft may be assuming that a branded tablet is a reasonably
sound strategy, particularly given the lackluster interest among consumers in
Android and Linux based tablets from mainline electronics manufacturers.

------
pinion247
Maybe they're taking a page from Apple's playbook in realizing that best user
experiences come from harmony between hardware and software?

I'd still peg Microsoft as a software company, although now they seem much
more willing to praise the hardware side of their business. It's likely the
hardware division's primary goal is not profit, rather to maximize potential
software sales.

~~~
icode
> realizing that best user experiences come from harmony between hardware and
> software

You mean there are some Windows specific features in their tablet? Which? And
why couldnt they have asked the other manufacturers to implement them?

~~~
pinion247
Microsoft has not announced any Windows features that would be specific to
their own hardware. And there are other manufacturers gearing up their own
Win8 tablets (Acer comes to mind). As a consumer we'll have a choice as to
what we feel is the best Win8 tablet. Microsoft doesn't care as long as we're
buying Win8 in some form and ensuring their long-term survival.

Microsoft likely wants to ensure Metro app functionality, inking, etc are all
available on great hardware. Microsoft is entering the realm of the iPad, and
to quickly gain traction in this space they will need to ensure they have a
fantastic hardware experience to go along with (what they believe) will be a
fantastic software experience. They _could_ leave that to 3rd party
manufacturers - and they are certainly giving those manufacturers a chance -
but they must feel it's necessary to create something themselves to help lead
the way.

I'm intrigued. Let's hope this works out better for them than the Zune did :)

------
runjake
I'm willing to bet that despite what they said in the announcement, that the
Surface models are based off of reference designs from Acer or Samsung. I
think that'll come out at some point.

If Microsoft was really designing their own hardware and engineering
prototypes, we would've already heard about it through the rumor mills.

------
CyberFonic
If the Surface comes out at an attractive price point (subsidized?) then how
long before somebody cracks it and runs Android or Linux on it? It was done
with the HP TouchPad and Apples iPad/iPod/iPhone.

------
dharma1
Windows 8 is a big risk for MS - they are being sidelined by Apple and Android
and running out of time. They couldn't take the risk of other companies
designing and manufacturing Win8 tablets not coming up with the goods for the
product design/hardware.

That's not to say Nokia or Samsung etc won't be putting out an exceptional Win
8 tablet, they may well do - but then again, they may not.

In terms of profit - I think MS will price the hardware as low as they can, to
fight off Apple. Their profit will come elsewhere

~~~
mrdodge
> In terms of profit - I think MS will price the hardware as low as they can,
> to fight off Apple. Their profit will come elsewhere

From where? They do not have a successful media store and they are bundling
Office. Aside from Windows and Office, the only things they sell at profit are
from 'Server and Tools'.

Internet and Devices/entertainment have been money-sinks. The idea they will
start turning Apple/Google-sized profits is wishful thinking

~~~
dharma1
only the ARM version of the tablet will come with a free (Metro) Office, with
the x86 version you have to buy Office.

Microsoft has multiple revenue streams- [http://www.microsoft.com/en-
us/news/press/2012/apr12/04-19fy...](http://www.microsoft.com/en-
us/news/press/2012/apr12/04-19fy12Q3earningsPR.aspx)

They are going after tablet market share - especially for business use - with
this reference design, and will try to keep the price down.

