Most Wanted

Nov 01, 2011 22:39

Meant to post this nearly a month ago, but it's still interesting. What kind of tablet do people really, really want to have? An Android device? No, surely it's got to be an iPad? Read on...

software development, information technology, hardware

Leave a comment

Comments 11

huskyteer November 2 2011, 10:18:22 UTC
Doesn't surprise me all that much, now it's been pointed out; people want a tablet that will sync with their desktop. So for me it would be an iPad, but for a Windows user...

Reply

ggreig November 2 2011, 10:49:02 UTC
I was a bit surprised since there isn't really a credible alternative to the iPad at the moment in hardware terms, but you're absolutely right it's about which stack people are bought into. For me, it's the Microsoft stack; for many of my friends it's Apple's. I was interested to note recently that over 50% of visits to my web site were from Safari!

I get frustrated working on a Mac developing for iPad/iPhone (as I am at the moment), but I remember more Mac-comfortable colleagues feeling the same about our MS environment. The real, practical differences between the platforms are not so great - a lot of it these days is just what conventions you're used to.

It's a shame MS don't invest more in developing hardware, because when they do it's generally pretty good, and I can't help feeling they're often let down by their box-shifting hardware partners. Having said that, they're clearly trailing even in tablet-friendly OS software at the moment, though Windows 8 may change that.

Reply

tobyaw November 2 2011, 12:47:10 UTC
I've become a firm believer that consumer-oriented devices benefit enormously from integrated design of hardware and software.

Microsoft manage that with their Xbox - why can't they do the same for tablets and phones?

Reply

ggreig November 2 2011, 13:35:57 UTC
Although they don't make their own phones, they've clearly taken a step in that direction by providing a fairly prescriptive spec to the hardware manufacturers (and working particularly closely with Nokia). So I think they recognise what you're saying, but getting into hardware's a big step that could damage a lot of existing business relationships and isn't particularly guaranteed to pay off. Perhaps the big risk isn't worth it while you're ahead.

Reply


tobyaw November 2 2011, 12:39:12 UTC
If only Microsoft hadn't cancelled the Courier, they might have a credible tablet platform that would be distinctly different from the other players.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-10805_3-20128013-75/the-inside-story-of-how-microsoft-killed-its-courier-tablet

But no, they had to go for the Windows-on-everything strategy (which I think is a significant contributor to the failure of every tablet that Microsoft has so far been involved with).

Reply

ggreig November 2 2011, 14:39:48 UTC
But I see (successful) Windows on everything as more appealing than a tablet with two screens. The question is whether they can do it successfully.

Rather frustratingly, I haven't had the opportunity to try Windows 8 on a touch-capable machine yet. Frustratingly, because on a desktop machine with a bog-standard monitor, I want to reach out and touch it. But it's not as mouse/keyboard friendly as one might hope. So the OS may work out for both environments, but plainly needs work before release if that's to be true. Of course MS know that and they have about a year to polish it in.

Reply

tobyaw November 2 2011, 15:04:53 UTC
The sad thing is how much effort Microsoft have put into tablets over the years - but with neither cultural nor commercial impact.

There has been something wrong with their strategy, or with their ability to deliver, and perhaps it is linked to the general stagnation that Microsoft has experienced over the past ten years. I think part of it is the mindset that says a tablet computer is defined by its form factor, but otherwise is just like a regular computer, a business device, to be managed and used like any other resource.

But the other approach - what Apple did with the iPad, what Microsoft do with their Xbox, what Palm did, what most mobile phone companies do - is to create a personal device. One where the user has a genuine feeling of ownership, where the user feels in control (I’d challenge anyone to feel in control of a standard Windows install!), and where the user has an emotional connection with their device ( ... )

Reply


Leave a comment

Up