Competing with the iPad is our top priority - Microsoft

Tom Dunne

So, it looks like Microsoft has become focussed on the iPad:

Ballmer said that Microsoft was working with software partners such as HP, Lenovo, Asus, Dell and Toshiba to develop a tablet-style computer that could rival Apple’s hugely popular iPad.

“It is job one urgency around here, nobody’s sleeping at the switch. We’ve got to push right now – right now – with our hardware partners. As soon as they’re ready, they’ll be shipping. We want to deliver products that people really want to buy.”

Source: Telegraph.co.uk

I know we are a little biased over here, but can Microsoft realistically pull it off?

I honestly can't see a Windows 7 operating system and associated hardware running comfortably on a pad/slate device. Imagine running Word or Powerpoint on such a device...

Inquitus

A tablet with proper multitasking, windowing, and Flash enabled is certainly a better prospect than the iPad, and I am quite sure a much more powerful device than the iPad could be delivered at the same pricepoint.

The iPad is doing well as its the only solution out there in a market that it has demonstrated clearly exists, and much like the original iPhone its a fairly flawed gadget short on features and processing grunt.

I'd swap my iPad for a decent windows tablet in a heartbeat.

Tom Dunne

Inquitus wrote: »

I'd swap my iPad for a decent windows tablet in a heartbeat.

But for what use?

Can you realistically expect the likes of Word and Powerpoint to run properly on such a device? And if not, will Microsoft sell two versions of software, one for desktop/laptop/netbook and one for tablet devices?

As I have said before, I see the iPad as a media consumer, not a media producer. I don't see why it wouldn't be any different for a Windows slate device.

paddydriver

Should be more worried about Android... thats where the greater long term threat comes from.

Think Ballmer takes these things too much to heart.. how many times has he wanted to kill Google etc too. Will be interesting to see how it all plays out in the long term - can only be good for us techie consumers; not for the credit card bill though

Inquitus

Tom Dunne wrote: »

But for what use?

Can you realistically expect the likes of Word and Powerpoint to run properly on such a device? And if not, will Microsoft sell two versions of software, one for desktop/laptop/netbook and one for tablet devices?

As I have said before, I see the iPad as a media consumer, not a media producer. I don't see why it wouldn't be any different for a Windows slate device.

I'd like to see windowing and true multitasking in a tablet, the ability to surf the web whilst watching a movie etc.

Also if it ran Windows 7 Starter it would open up the entire windows software market which could only be a good thing.

A tablet comparable in quality and grunt to an iPad, freed from Steve Jobs meglomaniacal chains would truly be an improvement on the iPad imo.

I do agree with your sentiment, and given windows track record in the non desktop market I harbour grave doubts about their ability to deliver, but we shall see.

alex73

Its a game of wait and see. I saw the Ipad in the airport, played with it, extremely cool device, but its just a large Iphone (without the phone) Would have been great to have a USB slot or ability to connect devices (like my camera or an iphone). I would buy an ipad if the price was not so hillarious. so its going to be interesting to see what he competion bring out.

as far as phones go, I have not need an equal competitor to the iphone yet.

Gregor Samsa

Balmer is acting as if Microsoft have just decided to take the iPad (and that class of devices) on, but the fact is that they've been making OSs for various tablet formats since 2001.

Between various forms of XP and CE, Microsoft and numerous hardware partners have already delivered tablet devices with windowing, full multitasking, Flash and the full Office suite, and fact is, no one wanted them.

The iPad has been a success because it doesn't try to be a full PC in a tablet, it's a different device. Apple didn't try to shoehorn OS X into a mobile device, they wrote a new OS specifically for the task. Google have a similar tactic with Android.

If Microsoft's best answer is to try and squish Windows 7 onto a tablet, then they've learned nothing from the last 9 years of trying.

Tom Dunne

Inquitus wrote: »

Also if it ran Windows 7 Starter it would open up the entire windows software market which could only be a good thing.

But that's the problem - trying to run desktop software on a pad. I remember playing with a Windows XP table/pen based PC a few years back - it was a complete turkey. It just didn't work. It was cumbersome, slow and inaccurate.

Granted, technology has improved considerably since then, but if Microsoft's answer is to make a desktop pc, without a keyboard and mouse, then I fully agree with phutyle:

phutyle wrote: »

If Microsoft's best answer is to try and squish Windows 7 onto a tablet, then they've learned nothing from the last 9 years of trying.

Gregor Samsa

Inquitus wrote: »

A tablet with proper multitasking, windowing, and Flash enabled is certainly a better prospect than the iPad, and I am quite sure a much more powerful device than the iPad could be delivered at the same pricepoint.

The iPad is doing well as its the only solution out there in a market that it has demonstrated clearly exists, and much like the original iPhone its a fairly flawed gadget short on features and processing grunt.

I'd swap my iPad for a decent windows tablet in a heartbeat.

The only solution? You could buy any one* of these to fulfill your criteria, :

http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_0_5?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=tablet+pc&x=0&y=0&sprefix=table

Most (or similar devices) have been on sale long before the iPad.

So how come the iPad could come along and blow them out of the water literally overnight?

The iPad has many flaws and (what I regard to be) missing features, but the way sales have gone, Apple must be doing something right, and MS must be doing something wrong. And from what Balmer is saying, are continuing to do so.


* For demonstration purposes only. Not a complete list. Your milage may vary. Blame Amazon's search function for the few non-tablet devices in there.

Inquitus

paddydriver wrote: »

Should be more worried about Android... thats where the greater long term threat comes from.

Think Ballmer takes these things too much to heart.. how many times has he wanted to kill Google etc too. Will be interesting to see how it all plays out in the long term - can only be good for us techie consumers; not for the credit card bill though

Google are focussing on tablets with Android 3.0 Gingerbread, but as I said over on the android forum, the difference in the appstores doesn't really come home to roost on phones, but on a tablet iOS Appstore would be substantially better than Androids.

jeromeof

What Microsoft should really do is produce a Tablet running a tablet version of Windows Phone 7. That interface (borrowed from Zune) would be the perfect interface for a tablet. The home tiles would scale nicely (showing real-time updates within each tile - like widgets) and each hub scrolls nicely horizontally. In my opinion, this would work very nicely on a 7inch or 10inch screen.
I imagine Microsoft are already making their suite of products work well on this OS, so both Office related products should work well assuming a good port by the Office team, Microsoft have already shown XBox games working on this OS (with windows live integration) and the music streaming capabilities from the Zune Marketplace are fantastic I believe. It also has fairly deep social networking.

Pittens

We'll see. The problem with Microsoft is that they don't do software, they do windows. Putting windows on a tablet has been done.

If the tablet is a Zune clone it is finished. If it is a Windows 7 phone magnified it may work. That UI would be better on a larger screen anyway. Before it comes out the iPad will have multitasking with a better switching mechanism than the iPhone ( because they can use the full screen). IOS 4.0.x will run on the iPad.

Don't forget that Apple have that mutitouch patent. They will probably sue any manufacturer who uses it.

Bob Z

Pittens wrote: »

We'll see. The problem with Microsoft is that they don't do software, they do windows. Putting windows on a tablet has been done.

If the tablet is a Zune clone it is finished. If it is a Windows 7 phone magnified it may work. That UI would be better on a larger screen anyway. Before it comes out the iPad will have multitasking with a better switching mechanism than the iPhone ( because they can use the full screen). IOS 4.0.x will run on the iPad.

Don't forget that Apple have that mutitouch patent. They will probably sue any manufacturer who uses it.

Apple have the multitouch patent? Can they do that?

KeithM89_old

Bob Z wrote: »

Apple have the multitouch patent? Can they do that?

Yes - when Steveo announced the first iPhone he made a point of saying they patented it

EDIT: Heres the clip

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JZBLjxPBUU

BrianD

phutyle wrote: »

Balmer is acting as if Microsoft have just decided to take the iPad (and that class of devices) on, but the fact is that they've been making OSs for various tablet formats since 2001.

Between various forms of XP and CE, Microsoft and numerous hardware partners have already delivered tablet devices with windowing, full multitasking, Flash and the full Office suite, and fact is, no one wanted them.

The iPad has been a success because it doesn't try to be a full PC in a tablet, it's a different device. Apple didn't try to shoehorn OS X into a mobile device, they wrote a new OS specifically for the task. Google have a similar tactic with Android.

If Microsoft's best answer is to try and squish Windows 7 onto a tablet, then they've learned nothing from the last 9 years of trying.

True, when you look at it MS have been in tablet computing for years. The biggest users have been in the commercial and industrial sectors - look at most restaurants. Granted they're not very portable or consumer orientated.

The advantage that Apple have is that they have been both a software and hardware developer where MS's expertese has been mainly software. I doubt if it would take much for them to develop a slimmeddown version of Win 7 for tablet or indeed a Win 7 with an interface designed for tablet use.

At the end of the day, MS were accused of copying the Mac OS GUI and selling it as Windows and we know who won that battle.

Oafley Jones

Keithm89 wrote: »

Yes - when Steveo announced the first iPhone he made a point of saying they patented it

EDIT: Heres the clip

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JZBLjxPBUU

Ahh the reality distortion field in full effect. Apple most certainly didn't invent mt and they won't be suing anyone for using multi-touch.

Bob Z

Oafley Jones wrote: »

Ahh the reality distortion field in full effect. Apple most certainly didn't invent mt and they won't be suing anyone for using multi-touch.

Even if they didn't invent they couldo hold other smaller
company in court for years and discredit them

Hobbes

alex73 wrote: »

but its just a large Iphone

After using one for a while I would say without a doubt that it is not just a large iPhone.

Would have been great to have a USB slot or ability to connect devices (like my camera or an iphone)

I am not sure why you would want to, but even so you can connect to a cloud drive and transfer media that way. Alternatively you can sync with your machine.

I can see why someone might want to sync to their iPhone to act as a modem, but the data sims are cheaper and faster then a normal phone sim.

What I find comical in all this is people went on about how much the iPad was going to suck without ever seeing one. Now they are set to sell more this year then netbooks have combined in the last 2 years.

Also people go on about a windows tablet. News flash, windows already had them for years. I own two. The problem with windows is that windows simply isn't designed for mobile devices. Which is why windows mobiles sucks so much.

Would be interesting to see what they bring out though. Personally I think they will be third (after Droid).

Oafley Jones

Bob Z wrote: »

Even if they didn't invent they couldo hold other smaller
company in court for years and discredit them

I doubt it would go past the hearing and they might not want to challenge as their own patents might be in danger owing to prior art. Also, the fact that they haven't brought a case against all the other companies using mt would count against them - this is also the reason why companies such as Apple, MS are so aggressive about protecting their IP.

Inquitus

Hobbes wrote: »

What I find comical in all this is people went on about how much the iPad was going to suck without ever seeing one. Now they are set to sell more this year then netbooks have combined in the last 2 years.

30+ million netbooks were sold in 2009, chances of apple getting anywhere near that with iPads in 2010 = 0.000000000000..............where dost thou find the effluent that spews forth from thy mouth?

BrianD

Bob Z wrote: »

Even if they didn't invent they couldo hold other smaller
company in court for years and discredit them

There have been various patent disputes between Apple, Microsoft, RIM and Nokia over the years - some of them would have had serious business implications had the suing company been successful. Each claiming that they invented one system or the other but it hasn't stopped any of the companies selling their wares in the interim. At the moment Apple is suing HTC over patent infringements and HTC is doing the same.

Pittens

BrianD wrote: »

There have been various patent disputes between Apple, Microsoft, RIM and Nokia over the years - some of them would have had serious business implications had the suing company been successful. Each claiming that they invented one system or the other but it hasn't stopped any of the companies selling their wares in the interim. At the moment Apple is suing HTC over patent infringements and HTC is doing the same.

HTC's patents are fairly weak affairs. Something to do with contacts in a list, or somesuch, and based on a licence from MS who are not suing. Apple could probably - even if they lost - just change the contacts list. I think the suit is against HTC because of HTC's implementation of the multi-touch.

But , yes , to the poster who said they dont have the patent. They do.Whether the patent holds is something else. They acquired Fingerworks which had the patents on various multi-touch implementations since 1998.

So, yes they have Fingerworks and their own patents. If even the "pinch-to-zoom" patent was won they would be in a good position. In any case I dont think that MS is going to borrow from this interface. They may go down the stylus route. again.

MrMojoRising

they also have a patent on antennas that don't function

BrianD

Pittens wrote: »

HTC's patents are fairly weak affairs. Something to do with contacts in a list, or somesuch, and based on a licence from MS who are not suing. Apple could probably - even if they lost - just change the contacts list. I think the suit is against HTC because of HTC's implementation of the multi-touch.

But , yes , to the poster who said they dont have the patent. They do.Whether the patent holds is something else. They acquired Fingerworks which had the patents on various multi-touch implementations since 1998.

So, yes they have Fingerworks and their own patents. If even the "pinch-to-zoom" patent was won they would be in a good position. In any case I dont think that MS is going to borrow from this interface. They may go down the stylus route. again.

The other problem is that American companies have a habit of patenting the notion of doing something rather than the technology behind it. If I recall Amazon claimed a patent on the one click to buy/shopping cart idea for online shopping.

Here's what Apple is claiming in their patent:

"Touch screen device, method, and graphical user interface for determining commands by applying heuristics


Abstract
A computer-implemented method for use in conjunction with a computing device with a touch screen display comprises: detecting one or more finger contacts with the touch screen display, applying one or more heuristics to the one or more finger contacts to determine a command for the device, and processing the command. The one or more heuristics comprise: a heuristic for determining that the one or more finger contacts correspond to a one-dimensional vertical screen scrolling command, a heuristic for determining that the one or more finger contacts correspond to a two-dimensional screen translation command, and a heuristic for determining that the one or more finger contacts correspond to a command to transition from displaying a respective item in a set of items to displaying a next item in the set of items. "

Assuming that Apple have patented multi touch and nobody else can use it - why are there numerous devices using it even if their application of it is not as good as Apples? Is it because Apple falsely claimed to have invented it and both the term and the function predates the iPhone?

I doubt if they will use a stylus given that technology has moved on.

Bob Z

I often wonder how companies can claim to patents on things like these? Could the person who invented the single touch screen have patened it?