Subscribe to Windows IT Pro
January 26, 2011 08:28 AM

Microsoft's iPad Response Is Too Tepid, Too Late

Windows IT Pro
InstantDoc ID #129519
Rating: (509)

Earlier this month, technology enthusiasts around the world awaited Microsoft's opening keynote address for the 2011 Consumer Electronics Show (CES), with the anticipation that CEO Steve Ballmer would talk up a new generation of Windows-based tablets that would take on Apple's surging iPad. Instead, Ballmer ignored some of Microsoft's key consumer brands, and he didn't use the word "tablet" until his closing remarks.

Disappointing, sure. But a year after Ballmer and company promised a strong response to the iPad and explicitly noted it would do to the tablet market what it previously did with netbooks—come from behind for the win—Microsoft's tablet strategy is still in shambles. At CES, the company talked up plans to migrate its dominant PC OS, Windows, to a new class of "system on a chip" (SOC)-based devices, which will include tablets and even smaller devices. But Microsoft Vice President Steven Sinofsky said this Windows version was still "two to three years" away.

So what's Microsoft's answer to the iPad today?

Based on a set of leaked internal slides, not much. In an internal December 2010 presentation that ZD's Mary Jo Foley got her hands on, Microsoft is relying on a familiar, if tired, message: Windows-based tablets offer "choice," better security, and compatibility with familiar enterprise applications, when compared with the iPad. And although Microsoft recognizes some key iPad strengths—long battery life, simplicity, and so on—it claims that Windows still retains the lead for the tasks that matter to information workers.

Microsoft, I'd like to introduce you to reality.

In reality, Apple sold tens of millions of iPads last year and is on track to sell tens of millions more next year. In reality, people are buying iPads. In reality, they're not buying Windows 7-based tablets. And in reality, they never will.

Furthermore, businesses are buying iPads, too, and piloting them in ever faster numbers. Part of the lack of resistance here, no doubt, is the three-plus years Apple spent making the iPhone more acceptable in enterprise environments. That learning went into the iPad, and businesses are openly interested in this new device out of the gate, and not waiting for future revisions. They're certainly not waiting on Microsoft.

And the problem for Microsoft isn't just one of timing. Windows, for all its utility, is a decades-old product that is bogged down by years of often-obsolete technology and UI conventions that were invented in the 1980s; it's just not optimized for the multi-touch compatible devices of today. So the company can add multi-touch features to Windows, as it has done, but the product isn't optimized for such usage, and neither are the devices that use Windows.

If time could just stand still for Microsoft! The company will arrive eventually at Windows 8, which will reportedly feature an alternative, tiles-based UI that closely resembles the superior, modern, and multi-touch-friendly Windows Phone 7 UI. Wait a few more years, and that system will be available on smaller, more efficient SOC devices. But time isn't standing still. By that point, the iPad will be firmly entrenched. Many other competitors—including those based on Android, the HP webOS devices, the Research in Motion (RIM) PlayBook, and more—will be in the market as well, and every one of those systems is based on a lean, mobile-focused OS, not a sprawling desktop-class OS that was designed during the Reagan presidency of the 1980s. This year, millions of people will choose tablets. Virtually none of them will run Microsoft software.

Combined with the other evidence, this suggests that Microsoft's dithering, this time, is going to lead to defeat in this market and, perhaps, ultimately in the market for mainstream computing. This will have long-term ramifications for the company, including diminishing the chances of ongoing success of the product it's trying to protect the most: Windows.

Microsoft knows all about the consumerization of IT. In fact, it's been talking up this trend for the past year. The problem is, the consumerization of IT could be the start of Microsoft's downfall if it doesn't start moving more quickly. In the past, Microsoft could always rely on its corporate customer to bolster earnings when consumers were staying away from its software. But what happens when businesses turn their backs on Microsoft, too?

It's a future that's difficult to even contemplate. But it's also becoming a very real concern.

Related Content:

ARTICLE TOOLS

Comments
  • O
    1 year ago
    Feb 01, 2011

    "Am I missing something about the market for touch screens?"

    You're ignoring complex PCB changes (caps, traces, resistors, PS2 controller), the fact you also lose the touch-pad, ribbon cables, power requirements, *lots* of space and weight, a couple hinges, cable routing, and require a more expensive clamshell body... The cost difference is vastly more than a "keyboard."

    I have no idea how to prove this, because it's like asking what 2+2 equals. The only answer I have: "It just does and everyone who designs hardware knows it does."

    Another convertable tablet with multi-touch and vastly superior components to iPad in every way and cheaper:
    http://www.amazon.com/dp/B004I1J7Z6/

    Here's a tablet that competes directly with the iPad for $399 but includes a camera *and* weighs a half-pound less:
    http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00422TXZA/

    "How can the netbook have better parts AND be more expensive due to the keyboard and clamshell."

    The netbook is cheaper. Apple loves ripping people off. Rolex does this too, because they sell image not technology. Apple isn't a tech company anymore. If they were, they would try to get significant enterprise sales.

    "Yet somehow there is not a single source on line that you can find which shows a 10" touch screen digitizer costs less than a keyboard..."

    And you can't find anything that lists the price of a 250GB hard disk in quantity 100K. Why? Because all of that information is confidential and published precisely nowhere.

    "Why do all other tablets cost more than netbooks?"

    I've already shown they don't with the Archos.

    Here is an Archos with Galaxy-Tab specs for $149:
    http://www.amazon.com/dp/tech-data/B003COZM2C/ref=de_a_smtd

  • 1
    1 year ago
    Jan 31, 2011

    O

    I used your numbers, not just isuppli. You claimed Apple has 40% margins and PCs have 5%. You used the $299 netbook as an example.

    So I have three different sources all pointing to the fact the touch screens are more expensive than a keyboard.

    The retail cost is more.
    The estimated cost from isuppli is more.
    The math based on margins is more.

    "There is no "proof" because no manufacturer in the world posts their actual pricing to the Internet "

    Yet somehow every price found shows keyboards cost less then touch screens. Am I missing something about the market for touch screens? Is the retail mark up on them magnitudes higher then the markup on other components? Do manufacturers only give volume discounts for touch screens and not keyboards?


    "I tell you 2+2 is 4, you don't believe it."

    I can verify that online. Yet somehow there is not a single source on line that you can find which shows a 10" touch screen digitizer costs less than a keyboard, either estimated, wholesale, or retail.

    I can understand that a unibody costs less in general than a clamshell assuming no other parts. But that is not the case here. You are a replacing a cheap part (keyboard) with a relatively (compared to the keyboard) expensive part (touchscreen digitizer).

    Even your argument about the ipad having inferior parts discredits your claim. How can the netbook have better parts AND be more expensive due to the keyboard and clamshell. The math just does not work out. Either the margins are way off or your claim is. Why do all other tablets cost more than netbooks? Samsung TAB, HP Slate, Blackberry playbook (estimated). Is there something that all their engineers don't know that you do? Or do all tablets just have 40% margins unlike every other product those companies make?






  • O
    1 year ago
    Jan 31, 2011

    "Thats strange...the unibody design with the touchscreen costs more to make. Why is that?"

    I doubt iSupply's number is remotely correct. You've keep adhering to that as your *only* point of proof, plus quoted some *consumer* pricing. I've never heard of any manufacturer who came out and said, "Yep, they're close enough." However, I've heard of tons of manufacturers who come out and say they are a load of malarkey.

    "You still have not shown a single scrap of proof that the unibody design with a touchscreen costs less than a keyboard."

    Study engineering. I tell you 2+2 is 4, you don't believe it. I've been at the top of the IT and R&D food chain at multiple firms that have made hardware. You can talk to any engineer on the planet and they'll back me up. Surely you have a friend or two with an EE degree. There is no "proof" because no manufacturer in the world posts their actual pricing to the Internet (and you know this, so you're sticking to an incorrect set of data that has no bearing on actual manufacturing costs because *you* think it backs your argument -- no engineer would agree).

    Plus Apple components for iPad and iPhone are unknown because they care completely proprietary (however have massive savings due to scale because they make tens of millions). Giving a BOM cost estimate for a Mac is a lot easier because everything is totally standard (almost everything is off-the-shelf, except the main board in Mac Mini and iMac -- but those can be estimated because custom main boards exist for PC laptops and all-in-ones).

    Plus the iPad screen really is garbage. Dell has a 10" netbook/tablet with a much better touch screen (true 720p) for about the same as an iPad.

    http://www.dell.com/us/p/inspiron-duo/pd?oc=fndoiz1&model_id=inspiron-duo

    I don't understand how you Apple fans can't see that and think, "gee, we're being ripped off." If they went unibody the price probably fall by at least $100. And the specs embarass the iPad.

  • 1
    1 year ago
    Jan 31, 2011

    @O

    You still have not shown a single scrap of proof that the unibody design with a touchscreen costs less than a keyboard. Repeating it over and over again does not make it true. You claim touch screen prices at 10" and less are trivial, yet still can't show that. I have not found that to be the case. Every place on line I have checked shows they are still one of the most expensive parts of any tablet/laptop.

    A telling sign is resorting to calling me an Apple fan since you can't seem to show any proof that what you say is correct.

    Lets take your examples using Apple with a 40% margin and PC vendor with a 5% margin.

    The $299 netbook in your example with the hinges, keyboard and all the "expensive" stuff costs $284 to make if the company has a 5% margin.

    The $499 ipad costs $356 to make if Apple has a 40% margin.

    Thats strange...the unibody design with the touchscreen costs more to make. Why is that?


    As to fewer sales, I meant profits. My bad...thanks for catching that. No significant number of users is going to pay $100 more for a keyboard on an iphone. Consumers think keyboards should cost less or the same, not more. The costs to Apple for adding an iphone with a slide out keyboard would likely offset additional sales. Having an entirely different model is expensive to manage from cradle to grave, and if you look at Apple's history they have moved from the model which failed them. Besides design and production costs (wouldn't they have to redesign the external antennae if there was a slide out keyboard?) the cost of managing all the extra parts (as you point out) and inventories is expensive. How many do they make to start? How many keyboard vs. non keyboards do they ship to each store? What about all the other stuff like cases? Now they have to design, stock and manage twice as many as those as well. They have just increased their logistics at least twofold, for a relatively small increase in sales.












  • O
    1 year ago
    Jan 28, 2011

    "So I fail to see how your claim that getting rid of the Keyboard and going to a touchscreen will lower the cost of products.

    You have not shown one bit of evidence that is the case.

    As to Apple charging $100 more for an iphone with a keyboard, you are crazy. That would all but guarentee fewer sales!"

    I've said over and over. A two part chassis with keyboard and touchpad, etc will cost more than a unibody without a keyboard, mouse, hinge, extra cabling, plastic, and only a touch screen. You're probably the only person who believes that significantly trimming a design results in higher costs. Touch screens are trivial in cost at small sizes sub 10 inches... Personally I think this falls into the category of an Apple fan trying to justify the inflated cost by any means possible. It's obvious the netbook at 299 contains vastly superior hardware on darn near every component but the touch screen. Faster CPU, x64 support, bluetooth, web cam, Nvidia ION capable of 1080p on the built-in HDMI port, same battery life, but a real OS that can run any Windows software. Guess what the 3G model costs? 199 on two year contract... That's a far cry from 699 or whatever the iPad 3G is running these days.

    Guarentee fewer sales? How the heck would offering two models mean fewer sales? People would be so offended by the sight of a model with a keyboard that they would run to another brand? Even if the second model sells a third the volume of the non-touch model, they'll only sell 80 million iPhones/year instead of 60 million from a single model... People who want a keyboard would be willing to pay a premium. Even with a landscape keyboard, the keys on a touch-screen smartphone are still to kludgy for me. My wife has a touch screen and try as I might, it's useless for input. Plus you need to remember, it's Apple - their customers pay more for less all the time. Heck Dell had a deal over the holidays that sold a PC with the same specs as a Mac mini for 299.

You must log on before posting a comment.

Are you a new visitor? Register Here

advertisement

advertisement

Windows is a trademark of the Microsoft group of companies. Windows IT Pro is used by Penton Media Inc. under license from owner.