Is Microsoft’s Surface Tablet Vaporware?

Will we see the Microsoft Surface released this year?

In the early 1990s the term “vapourware” appeared, it was born out of big software vendors announcing mythical products with a whole new bunch of features which the opposition already had.

Usually that next great product never appeared; it was just a ploy to stop customers defecting to the competition’s superior product.

There were a number of ways to spot vapourware – the lack of a working prototype, vague release dates and no firm pricing being just three.

Earlier this week, Microsoft brought tears to the eyes of grizzled IT industry veterans who missed the days of regular vapourware announcements with the “launch” of their Surface tablet computer.

After springing the event at short notice on the tech media, forcing the poor petals to travel to Los Angeles rather than their usual haunts of Silicon Valley, Manhattan or Texas and then starting the event late, Microsoft added insult to injury by not even letting the journalists play with a working version of the Surface, let alone take one home to play with.

One of the impressive things about vapourware are the specifications and this is true with the Microsoft Surface. The specifications of the base model Windows RT are about the same as the base model iPad with the added benefit of a keyboard, USB and Micro SD ports.

Looking past the hype, it’s clear Microsoft are having trouble with their strategy of a unified operating system across smartphones, tablets and traditional PCs, which has forced them to announce two different versions of the Surface, running different operating systems on different chipsets.

Having potentially incompatible products makes it even more important for tech journos and early adopters to play with the new devices to see how well they work – that version one of any new product doesn’t work well is another lesson from the 1990s IT industry.

In the spirit of vapourware, Microsoft hasn’t mentioned what either version of the Surface will cost, which probably indicates they don’t know what the final sticker price will be either.

Despite being funny, there was a serious side to vapourware – in the 1990s businesses often held off purchasing decisions or upgrades as they waited for promised products or features to arrive.

While eager customers waited for products that never arrived, their productivity slipped and technologies that should have been adopted earlier ended up coming late to the office desktop.

For Microsoft investors, the nature of the Surface announcement should be disturbing as the vapourware business tactic only works for incumbents in a strong market position and the software giant is anything but strong in the tablet computer market.

While it would be good to see a credible competitor to the iPad, it’s going to be difficult to take Microsoft seriously until we see some working versions that we can play with.

The lessons from the 1990s computer industry are clear – don’t fall for vapourware and buy what works for your business today.

Similar posts:

Disrupting the markets

Mary Meeker’s All Things D tech industry presentation raises some fascinating points.

Generally it’s not a good idea to have nearly a hundred slides in a presentation, but Mary Meeker’s overviews of the tech industry are so rich in data it’s impossible not to spend a weekend looking over the entire sldieshow.

Last week Mary gave her presentation at the All Things Digital conference and as usual she identified a range of trends and issues in the technology industries.

Smartphone upsides

Still the early days of smartphone adoption, with 6 billion mobile phone subscriptions worldwide but only 954 million smartphones activated.

This adoption is driving mobile revenues with income growing at 153% per year. Although as she shows later, this is not necessarily good news for everybody.

Print media’s continued decline

A constant in Mary’s presentations over recent years the key slide in has been ad spend versus usage across various mediums.

In this year’s version we still print still vastly over represented with 25% of US advertising while TV remains static, although Henry Blodget at Business Insider thinks the tipping point might be arriving for broadcasters.

Online’s thin returns

One of the things that really jumps out is how thin onlie revenues really are. In annual terms services like Pandora and Zynga are making between 6 and 25 dollars per active user over a year.

These tiny revenues indicate the problem content creators have in making money on the web, after the gatekeepers like Pandora or Spotify have taken their cut, there isn’t much left to go around.

Facebook and Google are also encountering problems as users move to mobile where revenues are even smaller than those from desktop users. This is constraining both services’ earnings growth.

Disrupting markets and governments

Mary’s presentation goes on to look at the disruption web and mobile technologies are bringing to various markets – it’s a good overview of whats changing right now and the products driving the changes.

It’s not just markets that are being disrupted with Mary also looking the US’s budget position and entitlement culture. This in itself is a massive driver of change which will have a deep effect on our lives regardless of where we live.

Are we in a bubble?

Mary finishes up with a look at whether we’re in a tech bubble or not.

Her view is that we are and we aren’t – there are silly valuations of companies in the private market however the poor performance of tech stocks on the stock market indicate the public aren’t being fooled.

One telling statistic is the only 2% of companies have accounted for nearly all the wealth creation of the 1,720 US tech IPOs between 1980 and 2002. There’s little to indicate much has changed in the decade since.

The optimism in funding new businesses is based in the disruption they are bringing to markets and industries – you only need one eBay or Google in your portfolio and you’re a legend, if not filthy rich.

Both the economic and technological changes are disrupting our own businesses and this is why its worth reading and understanding Mary Meeker’s presentations if only to be prepared for the inevitable changes.

Similar posts:

Bringing your own device and business change

how the Bring Your Own Device philosophy is changing the businesses operate.

Two years ago I realised that the management trend of staff bringing their own computers to work – BYOD – was more than a fad when I noticed executives were bringing the then new iPads to meetings.

Most of these executives worked in organisations where IT departments had waged war on employees connecting their own equipment to the corporate network, so this was a serious development in the computing world.

In many ways employees had been bringing their own technology devices to work for years. It was, and still is, quite common to see public servants and those working for other bureaucratic organisations arriving at meetings with an underfeatured work supplied handset and their own smartphone.

IT managers hated this as they saw those private devices as a security risk and another headache for their overworked staff to deal with.

When the iPod was enthusiastically adopted by the executive suite, the game was over for those IT managers. Suddenly they had to deal with these devices and the issues involved.

At a seminar run by systems integrator Logicalis earlier this week looked at some of the issues around BYOD for companies. What was striking in their presentations were the need for HR and legal departments to be part of the process for adopting this philosophy.

The BYOD philosophy is a big jump for organisations as it means relaxing controls on employees and for many managers that is the biggest challenge.

Part of that challenge is controlling the organisation’s data on devices that could be going anywhere and doing anything.

While companies like Logicalis and Citrix address this with remote desktop applications that create a virtual Windows desktop on the employee’s device, networking giant Cisco offer their ISE devices to run “identity services” that set up rules controlling what staff can access and where they can access it from.

Cisco Australia’s Chief Technology Officer Kevin Bloch gave a good round earlier this week up of where they see BYOD driving business. To Cisco, the move to mobile devices is irresistible as shown in their Global Mobile Data Traffic Update.

Interesting both Kevin and the Logicalis speakers see BYOD as being part of the recruitment process. Increasingly younger workers expect they will be able to use their own devices rather than relying upon employer issued workstations and mobile phones.

According to Kevin, Cisco’s research is finding many employees would trade salary for the right to bring their own device which is something that should grab the attention of budget constrained managers.

This also ties into other employer trends such as Activity Based Workplaces where companies provide hot desks and staff are expected to store their items away at the end of each workday.

Ross Miller of the GPT Group described how this is another trend driving the paperless office as staff using hot desks find packing away files and paperwork each day is an unnecessary hassle.

What we’re seeing with businesses adopting BYOD policies is a big change in the way places operate and this has consequences for all divisions of an organisation from HR and legal through to marketing and corporate affairs. It’s a genuine game changer.

How the BYOD philosophy is changing business is good example of technology driving our habits and work practices in ways we don’t always anticipate.

One thing is for sure, the workplace of the future is far more autonomous and diverse than those we’ve been used to for the last hundred years, the businesses who don’t adapt are those being left behind.

Similar posts:

Locking in the mobile market

Where are the next challenges for a phone industry that’s re-invented itself?

Mobile phone carrier Vodafone yesterday announced its purchase of Cable and Wireless, the company that rolled out the telegraph and phone networks that connected Britain’s empire.

Vodafone’s purchase is one of the final phases of the telco industry’s long term restructure where customers – both home and business users – have switched from land lines to mobile devices.

It’s long been acknowledged the profit in this market lies in devices and data usage which is why Cable and Wireless steadily declined over the past quarter century.

While there’s good money to be made in running undersea cables, which is what C & W did, the big profit is in delivering the data over the “last mile” to the customer.

For most customers, that last mile is the radius around a cellphone base station.

In Australia, this is best illustrated by Telstra’s undisguised glee at being able to offload their legacy copper network and backbone services to the government owned National Broadband Network allowing the former land line monopoly to focus on the mobile, data customer.

That data aspect is important too, one of the big changes in telecommunications over the last 25 years has been the rise of data.

A quarter century ago, voice communications were the main traffic of these networks. For companies like Cable and Wireless, data was a profitable sideline with services like Telex and ISDN being lucrative business niches.

Those rivers of gold distracted incumbent telcos in the early years of the public Internet as they tried to protect those expensive data plans and discouraged customers from using the net.

Over time, a new breed of Internet Service Providers rose who could supply those data services customers wanted.

Ironically, the same thing has happened with mobile phone manufacturers and the rise of the smartphone. Unlike the incumbent telcos, they haven’t adapted.

The incumbents phone manufacturers like Nokia and Motorola missed the rise of data communications and the mobile web as the iPhone and Android devices delivered the portable utility that “dumb phones” couldn’t deliver.

For Nokia, that miss appears fatal with the company rapidly running out of cash as their smartphone devices fail in the marketplace and margins collapse in the sectors they still dominate.

Research In Motion – the manufacturers of the Blackberry phone – are in the same trap. While their devices were data orientated they were more akin to corporate “feature phones” where they did one or two things well but couldn’t deliver the full features mobile phone users increasingly wanted.

The rise of the iPhone threatened Blackberry’s market and the arrival of the iPad with applications like Evernote killed most of the product’s demand.

Blackberry and Nokia’s decline while companies like Telstra and Vodafone survive – not to mention massive profits of companies like Mexico’s Telefonica – illustrate the value of government licenses to telcos and the breathing space it gives the management of these licensees.

We shouldn’t underestimate though the risks to all these businesses if they don’t adapt.

Similar posts:

It’s all in the timing

Being first is no guarantee of success if your timing is wrong.

This morning I sat in on a corporate breakfast and heard a well known presenter talk about social media for business owners and managers.

The advice was terrible and what was valid could have come from a 2008 book on business social media marketing.

But the room loved it and obviously the client – a major bank – thinks the speaker’s work is worthwhile. He has a market while many of us who’ve been covering this field for a decade don’t.

Timing is everything in business. Earlier this week stories went around the Internet about how Microsoft could have invented the first smart phone.

Microsoft could well have done it, they tried hard enough with Windows CE devices through the late 1990s and there was also the Apple Newton and the Palm Pilot.

While all these companies could have developed the smartphone in the 1990s it wouldn’t have mattered as neither the infrastructure or the market were ready for it.

Had Microsoft released the smartphone in the mid 199os it would have been useless on the analogue and first generation GSM cellphone networks of the time.

Customers were barely using the web on their personal computers, let alone on their mobile phones, so the smartphone would have been useless and unwanted.

Ten years later things had changed with 3G networks and real consumer demand so Apple seized the gap in the marketplace left by Motorola, Nokia and the other phone manufacturers with the iPhone and now own the market.

Apple weren’t the first to market with a smartphone, just as Microsoft weren’t the first with a Windows-style operating system and Facebook weren’t the first social media platform.

Those who were first to the market stood by while upstarts stole the market they built.

Plenty of people have gone broke when their perfectly correct investment strategies have been mistimed – “the market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent” is often proved true.

That’s the same with the speaker this morning; he’s not the first to discover social media’s business benefits but his timing is impeccable.

Being first is no guarantee of success if your timing is wrong.

Similar posts:

Towards heterogeneous networks

Why HetNets are a great hope of the technology sectors

A new idea might cut the size of many phone bills, as usual though the devil is in the detail.

One of the hallmarks of the technology industry is the use of jargon; every few months a new buzzword or phrase comes along that captivates the industry and dominates the tech media.

A phrase that’s going to become common in the next few months is Heterogeneous Networks, the concept that mobile phones will be able to switch between phone systems and wireless networks without the user noticing.

Overnight the two major standards organisations agreed to work towards a common framework for phones to run these networks which also go by the name of HetNets.

For consumers the benefit with heterogeneous networks is they can reduce costs as phones automatically switch to cheaper, and usually faster, Wi-Fi hotspots.

The benefit for mobile phone network operators is that data demands are swamping their networks that were originally designed for voice communications. By offloading some of the load to private Wi-Fi systems they hope to manage their systems better.

Of course one should never underestimate a telco’s desire to make a buck and most telecommunications companies see the opportunity to make a few dollars out of offering the feature.

A major concern in putting together these systems is going to be security, using anybody’s Wi-Fi network requires a degree of trust and if a smart phone or tablet computer is accessing these without the owner knowing the risks are substantially higher.

These risks are even higher still if the banking and telco industries manage to convince people to use their mobile phones as an electronic wallet.

Seamlessly connecting to networks is one of the holy grails for mobile device manufacturers and software designers and it’s something that consumers will probably welcome when it becomes reliable.

For the moment we can expect to hear breathless articles about developments in the area and the promises from suppliers about the technology.

As usual the early adopters will leap in and suffer the usual disappointments and heartbreak that is life on the bleeding edge of technology.

Eventually though, long after the hype has settled down, these systems will become commonplace and expected by consumers.

Whether it makes more money for telcos though is another matter.

Similar posts:

Reinventing point of sale

Cloud and mobile devices are changing retail systems.

One of the banes of running a business computer support organisation were cash registers.

Retail Point Of Sale (POS) systems were almost always arcane, clunky and difficult to maintain, at PC Rescue we dreaded a call from a shop, pub or hairdresser having problems with their registers.

Frequently this was by design, the POS system supplier would try to lock in their business customers into expensive support contracts.

By making it difficult for anybody without intimate knowledge of the product to actually do anything with it, the retailer was stuck having to hire overpriced custom support.

To make things worse, many of the POS systems ran on outdated hardware which offered the suppliers another opportunity to hit their customers (victims?) with high support costs.

Since the iPad was released, I’ve been waiting for an application using cloud services for a back end that challenges the existing Point of Sale systems and today US online payments system Square has announced their Square Register app.

While only available in the US, Square has been setting the pace for physical payment systems like taxi fares and coffees using online technologies so it’s hardly surprising they are leading this push.

The iPad as a cash register is a logical step for the device and tied in with a robust Point Of Sales platform behind a simple to use app, it will probably make a huge dent in the point of sale market.

It may be the Square service won’t be the point of sale leader – Square is more a payments service than retail platform – which means this field is way open for some savvy operators.

One of the concerns with the Square service, and any iPad based application, is the spectre of vendor lock-in. Being fixed on the iOS platform means there is a risk of being held hostage to Apple’s business plans, also being locked into Square’s payment systems may not be the best choice for many merchants.

The payments and point of sale industry is another that’s being radically changed by mobile devices coupled with cloud computing. It’s not a time for incumbents to rest on their laurels.

Similar posts: