Microsoft seemingly is placing a lot of faith in their Surface tablets to
consolidate profits into their coffers. Unfortunately the level of engineering
still doesn't match Apple for instance.
Steve Ballmer has purportedly been
doing his 'Developers!, Developers!,...' chants for most of a year. We're
seeing slow uptake for Windows 8, both because it shifts the balance of commerce
from free market sales to the Windows Store disadvantaging big developers and
because to date we're dealing with vaporware. Microsoft hasn't built it (yet)
and they haven't come - particularly those developers that are key to
Microsoft's 20% vig on sales through the Windows Store.
There isn't a whole
lot of information out there supporting Microsoft is serious or can do volumes
to even match the iPad introduction. They need to outstrip that to succeed.
(The Windows RT tablet is slated to be introduced before Christmas while the
x86-64 version is slated for the new year, purportedly).
If Microsoft were
serious about the Windows RT Surface they'd integrate functionality into their
own System On a Chip, enabling them to drive battery life up. There's little
silly things in their Surface Tablets, like the integral stand, which won't work
worth a bean on soft or uneven surfaces (like bed comforters or even laps).
Requiring a Touch Cover or Type Cover to be attached seems contraindicated,
too (and ya, where could the hide the batteries and what would that do to the
margins). If you wanted an attached keyboard, how about and Ultrabook or a Mac
Air? An iPad2 and keyboard/case are cheaper than the Surface Windows
RT.
Trying to compete directly with Apple (as a market follower no less)
they'll find out that it's quality, innovation and control of supply chain
costs. It'll likely take them a couple more years to be able compete
effectively, and where will Apple be then?
Note all the patent backbiting
trying to hold back the competition (i.e. Google Chrome). Both Apple and
Microsoft are striving to prevent the personal computing industry from
collapsing into a commodity (unless it ends up in their Cloud). Somewhere in
this we're supposed to believe it's about innovation, while it seems more likely
to be about anti-competition.
A couple of well placed decisions blunting the
patent threat and maybe Google could pull it off yet.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
| 
