Microsoft Needs to Get the Windows Tablet Right, or Call it Quits

July 19, 2010 By Rob Enderle

Apple’s PR meltdown over the iPhone 4 could give Microsoft the opening it needs to bring a successful Windows Tablet to market.

Apple has gotten itself into quite a mess. After widespread complaints from users over reception problems with the iPhone 4, the company’s typically reliable PR machine made some really questionable moves.

Had the company just admitted to having a problem up front and issued free rubber bumpers or covers for the phone (something I think they likely should have always done, given how fragile it is), I’ll bet it would have been trivialized. However, Apple instead tried to cover up the problem. In the end, many publications, including Consumer Reports, have effectively called the firm dishonest, earning Apple unflattering comparisons to Toyota and the phone itself to Windows Vista.

Apple did apologize and give folks free bumpers eventually, but only after a US Senator had gone public saying the bumpers weren’t enough, and in the apology was a false comparison of the antenna problem to other phones (Apple’s external antenna is unique and the other vendors are calling foul). One product has a lot of people looking at Apple differently that week, and for Apple, that isn’t a good thing.

This might be just the break Microsoft needs. A killer Windows Tablet that outperformed the iPad in some critical areas could make a splash right now, while another dud could have the opposite effect, confirming that the executive team has likely overstayed their welcome. Let’s explore what this chink in Apple’s armor means for Microsoft.

Windows Tablet: Life Preserver or Anchor?

As sunny skies seem to be darkening for Apple, Microsoft remains under its own cloud. While it has had a tablet in market since the early part of last decade, it has never gone well. The Mira and Origami failures were put in sharp contrast to the iPad which, while far from perfect, was also far less crippled and much better marketed. Microsoft’s historic cell phone efforts and recent Kin failure (which cratered morale and has employees pleading with Bill Gates to return) has made it look like Microsoft simply can’t compete, and there is growing pressure for the company to rethink its executive team… as in replace most of them. This is not dissimilar to what happens to a losing sports team, until that team wins, and then all is forgiven, and folks kiss and make up.

The Windows Tablet, done right, could be that win. But done wrong, it would only confirm the opinions of those that think that Microsoft needs executive changes in order to survive. HP’s move to the Palm platform after being the poster child for the initial Windows 7 Tablet would indicate that things weren’t as they needed to be. Reports were the product was heavier than the iPad, very slow when it came to touch applications, and had about half the battery life, all for about the same price. HP concluded it wouldn’t sell, and paid over a billion dollars to buy Palm and come up with something that could compete.

However, you may recall that when Steve Jobs first showed the iPhone, it was largely non-functional, and in the following six months, Apple turned a brick into a product that had lines around the block to purchase it. HP did not see the final Windows Tablet, and both Microsoft and Intel are working overtime to make sure those initial problems don’t end up in the final offering.

What the Windows Tablet Needs to Be

Because expectations for the product Windows Tablet are already so low, and because Apple is currently trending, thanks to the iPhone 4, to becoming another untrusted vendor, the requirements for the Windows Tablet have likely become more reasonable. But matching the iPad in terms of price and performance are just table stakes, and it will need to excel in some areas.

Those areas that are a given: PC application support, multi-tasking, weight, Wi-Fi network access, Flash support, camera support, browser choice, tethering support, and a choice of different vendors, hardware and carriers. Those areas it still needs to match on are touch performance, battery life, price, and ease of use. Even if Microsoft can deliver all that, if it doesn’t come wrapped in an Apple-level marketing and introduction effort, it could be perceived for its shortcomings and not its advantages, and still lose, as most currently expect it to. In fact, given how many think the Windows Tablet will fail, Microsoft and its partners will have to be willing to step up significantly if they want to change that impression, even if their product is much better. After all, people don’t like to admit they are wrong.

Finally, the iPad has several distinct weaknesses. It has the wrong kind of display for a reader (both hard on the eyes for reading, and hard to see outdoors), you can’t stream movies on 3G due to AT&T restrictions, its content library for books and multimedia is very small, and Apple appears to be excessively restrictive on content. Standing out in one or more of these areas could allow the Windows crew to prove they can play to win. Oh, and I should also mention, the product desperately needs to be attractive.

Windows Tablet: A Must Win for Microsoft

Like many, I have my doubts whether Microsoft will step up to this challenge with enough resources. We’ve clearly seen them underfund Zune and Origami, destroy Kin (which was a good idea horridly executed), and with all eyes on them, they may not realize that a lot of jobs likely depend on them hitting it out of the park with the new Windows Tablet. Microsoft has the technology. They have the capability. They even have Kathleen Hall, one of the few folks on the planet capable of out-marketing Apple. But do they have the will to do what it takes to put it all together and win?

Companies turn on efforts like this, and we’ll know in a few weeks whether Microsoft steps up or repeats what has been a disappointing trend. The whole “it doesn’t matter if you win or lose but how you played the game” thing is BS. It matters whether you win or lose, and Microsoft has to win this one.

Showing 9 comments

LINUX USER at 6:28pm 9th August 2010 @Guest who said "Microsoft does not innovate.." Youre an idiot who jsut doesnt like Microsoft for some plain old selfish reason - which I don't dare try to guess becuase I dont have the next five years to dive into your ignorant mind. You obviously dont know the history of microsoft products. And if you think that Microsoft acts differently from other companies that buy smaller ones fo rgood ideas, then again, youre an idiot. Grow up. MS has more innovative minds behind them than the entire industry put together. Their (Microsoft's) faults are their dumbass marketing departments and their inability to tackle distribution problems.
Guest at 7:52pm 5th August 2010 Microsoft does not innovate, they acquire other companies and their products. Microsoft has always followed trends... they DO NOT set them.
Superb_Logic at 7:43pm 23rd July 2010 "you can’t stream movies on 3G due to AT&T restrictions," Say what? I can stream Netflix over 3g just fine on my iPad. Did I get a special one?
ioman at 12:21am 20th July 2010 I think you have a little too much bias going on. "As to Consumer Reports calling Apple dishonest, I think it might be better to take a look at Consumer Reports' own practices. Why are almost all their articles behind a paywall except for the iPhone one? Also, it seems the iPhone 4 got their highest ratings as well, as have the previous versions of the iPhone. I'm not sure they can be as trusted as they used to be in "the old days." " So because Consumer Reports is usually behind a paywall, they are not allowed to advertise certain tests because of that? How do you expect them to get more subscribers? Show me a better review magazine than Consumer Reports. They do not even take advertising money. I love Apple products, but to say they are the end-all and better than non-Apple products is a simply an opinion. PC sales statistics alone will show that Apple computers alone are flattening out growth-wise. And their overall market share in the PC market is tiny compared to Windows based machines. The fact that you overcome every iPad obstacle by blaming someone else I.E. AT&T is sad. Isn't it Apple's fault that they decided to use AT&T? Or did they have no choice? Lets get real here.
1. @selgart at 7:02am 20th July 2010 Interesting response. I didn't want to write too much about Consumer Reports because that's not what the article was about, but I fear I might have been a little *too* brief. I used to love CR. They're a great review magazine, and the fact that they *still* don't accept advertising is amazing. However, sometimes their reviews need to go a little further, or need to be read a little differently. For example, I bought one of their highest rated toaster ovens. It works great, and in their testing came out pretty near the top of its price range. However, what they didn't mention is that there's no temperature control. You get about 10 different settings (e.g., frozen food, baked goods, pizza) and a time control. The problem with this is that you don't know what temperature the frozen food setting uses, for example. So the toaster oven may be great, but it's unbearably frustrating to use because you can't set it for 350° and 12 minutes. And let's not even get into the fact that there's only light, medium and dark for the toast settings. So the problem here is that you have one of their highest rated toaster ovens that turns out to be more or less unusable because the user interface stinks. Does it work? Sure. Is it actually usable by consumers? Not so much. That's just one personal example. Think about their car ratings for a minute, though. The Chrysler Sebring is a decent car. Not great, not terrible. I used to rent them all the time for business trips. But the problem is that unsatisfied users who have had problem cars vote them down terribly, while satisfied users who have had good experiences aren't as motivated to send in their votes. The same is true of people who buy the "better" cars. They tend to vote theirs up, and to report good experiences more often, to support their purchase. So most of their car ratings have a skew to them. There are tons of articles about CR's ratings biases out there, a quick Google search will certainly turn up a few of them. And that's why I mentioned Consumer Reports at all in my post. They have at the same time the highest rated phone *and* one which after the fact they don't recommend. It's somewhat hard to reconcile those two positions. As to the paywall issue, there's nothing inherently wrong with that. However, to post their one highly controversial article outside the paywall seems to me to be an on-purpose gambit to use the controversy they had a role in stirring up. If they left the article behind the paywall and merely advertised it, I would have been a lot more comfortable with the ethics of the situation I would have agreed with you. But they didn't advertise it as you suggested that they're allowed to do, they used a bit of a trick to get more page views. Lastly, it seems weird to hammer me on "overcoming every iPad obstacle by blaming someone else" when I did no such thing. Did you actually read what I wrote? The article listed three supposed weaknesses: wrong kind of display, 3G streaming, very small content library. Wrong kind of display? To me, that sounds like the writer didn't actually take a look at one. The display is gorgeous (in my ever so humble opinion, but also as stated in many reviews). 3G streaming? That's *definitely* an ATT issue as they won't allow it (or at least haven't in the past). But I didn't anywhere blame them for it, I simply happened to mention it, and said that ATT not allowing 3G streaming, justified or not, has nothing to do with Apple. And saying there's only a very small amount of content for the iPad is just laughably wrong. So no, nowhere am I blaming anyone for anything. I simply questioned some points in the article which to me seemed decidedly odd. So yeah, let's get real here, as you say. Apple wanted to go with GSM, a world standard phone type. That ruled out Verizon right off the bat. Their only real choices in the US were ATT and T-Mobile, and they went with the bigger ATT. So basically, in the US they didn't have much of a "real" choice at all. It was more or less ATT or nothing. I didn't come here to defend Apple, I came here to read about the potential Microsoft tablet. What I found, however, was two bits of erroneous *and* gratuitous Apple bashing. Why include things like that in an article about a Microsoft tablet? I didn't come here with any sort of mission, but what I read in the article needed to be corrected, or at least to have it pointed out as completely irrelevant to the point of the article. Oddly, there's only a few comments. I expected dozens or hundreds maybe. Looks like it's just you and me arguing, though, about topics unrelated to Microsoft tablets. Your turn. :-)
@selgart at 4:29pm 19th July 2010 Well, I agree with your basic premise, that Microsoft needs to hit a home run to stay relevant in this particular field, and maybe even a grand slam will be needed. However, there are a rather large number of untruths in this article. I'm not sure there were really widespread complaints from iPhone 4 users. There were widespread complaints from bloggers and the media, but it seems that most users are quite satisfied (and this is backed up somewhat by Apple's statistics as well, for however much that's worth). As to Consumer Reports calling Apple dishonest, I think it might be better to take a look at Consumer Reports' own practices. Why are almost all their articles behind a paywall except for the iPhone one? Also, it seems the iPhone 4 got their highest ratings as well, as have the previous versions of the iPhone. I'm not sure they can be as trusted as they used to be in "the old days." And to say they free bumpers were in any way the result of Chuck Schumer's publicity grab is nothing short of ludicrous. You go on to say people are looking at Apple differently now. That's quite true, as millions of people are buying iPhones and iPads. You're right, Apple is really having some trouble, aren't they? And speaking of the iPad, later in the article you trot out what you claim are several distinct weaknesses. It has the wrong kind of display for a reader? Really? Until the iPhone 4's brilliant display I would have said the iPad's display was amazing. Crisp and clear and perfect for reading. I'm looking forward to the second generation iPads that will presumably get the new screen type. Hard to see outdoors? Maybe, but it's easily enough tiltable to lessen any glare there might be. 3G streaming? It's hard to see how an ATT issue is Apple's fault. Content library for books and multimedia very small? That's the biggest howler of the bunch. There's the entire Kindle library, the entire Nook library, Apple's own iBooks, and all the movies and TV shows you could possibly want on iTunes. There's also plenty of free Project Gutenberg type stuff available as well. It's somewhat hard to see how you could possibly refer to this as Apple being excessively restrictive on content. If you're technically up to it, it's easy enough to transfer your own ebooks and movies to the iDevices and not have to deal with Apple's "limits." And actually, you leave out the three most important omissions of the iPad: direct USB access, an SD card slot, and cameras. You made up a few unreasonable "weaknesses" and left out the ones that might actually be genuine. Oddly, I more or less agree with your comments on Microsoft and any potential new tablet. However, given your inaccuracies relating to Apple, I'm not sure if I can trust the reliability of your Microsoft points either. The only win Microsoft's had lately has been the Xbox, and even that took forever to make any money. Their phones are awful, so it's hard to imagine that they could make a tablet anyone would want to buy. And that's what Apple does. They consistently make products millions of people want to buy and are happy to own. I'm certainly interested in seeing a Microsoft tablet, but until it's real it's going to be darn hard to imagine they can make anything decent, let alone an iPad killer.
ioman at 8:33pm 19th July 2010 The problem with Microsoft is that their tablet would have to run off of Windows 7 which is a full-blown OS. Apple at least can modify iOS 4 which is on the iPhone, for use with the iPad. Microsoft on the other hand cannot use Windows Mobile and the Windows Phone 7 OS is still too early to adapt to tablet phone I think. They would still need a good 2-3 years of polish before taking it and putting it tablet-side. The overall problem with Microsoft is that they are not innovating anymore, they are playing catch up. And when you play catch up, you are playing with fire. You have to create something better than the initial innovator and make something truly compelling enough to make people want to leave the first company. Google did that with Android by creating a great alternative OS that is compatible with many manufacturers, that in itself is almost the same as making the initial tech. Microsoft on the other hand, is out of options, they are last to the party and will likely be overlooked and fail as a result.
1. lewisshepherd at 10:43pm 19th July 2010 Google "innovated" by buying the company Android, not by creating an OS from scratch. No knock against that, but it certainly wasn't organic innovation.
  1. ioman at 12:11am 20th July 2010 Yes and no. Android Inc was the company they bought, but the Android OS was not nearly close to what it is now. The designers/developers from Android Inc. continued to build the OS to Google specifications etc. In any event, you are right, it was not organic innovation. But...innovation is still innovation regardless of whether it was purchased or not. Microsoft still is not innovating in any capacity from what I can tell. They haven't been the first at anything in quite some time.