Tablet PCs - And the Winner IS... Apple (For Now)

There was a pretty interesting article in DigiTimes that said that most of the major hardware manufacturers were going to throw in the towel in terms of the tablet PC market, and instead focus on "ultrabooks" (not "netbooks" like they did 2 years ago).

Hmmmm....

If you don't know what an "ultrabook" is here's a video that explains it. Basically, think of the MacBook Air. It's a thin notebook PC that lacks an optical drive, has an "instant on", and will periodically "poll" the network for RSS updates, etc.

I guess hitting the "refresh" button on your web page was a little too cumbersome for some folks.

Oh yeah, and it has a physical keyboard.

YAWN.

"Ultrabook"? Really?

It's more like: "Hey we know how to build notebooks, but since we can't compete in the tablet market because our operating systems are too bloated with crap - let's just invent a new 'category' of devices because that's something we can control."

It's so funny to me that rather than try to make their mobile operating systems (Android and Mobile Windows 7 or 8) - work well and quickly on the more modest hardware of the tablet - they are just giving up and going back to the old status quo.

Oh sure, it has some brushed aluminum, and it's thinner and lighter than a "traditional" laptop or notebook - it's essentially the same thing.

And it's already be "done" - again, by Apple.

I know that Amazon's Kindle Fire is selling like gangbusters - but have you checked out their own product review page? People are saying - "it's cool - for what it is."

Meh.

People were really looking for a fast, elegant, responsive - and less expensive iPad. They thought - "Hey, it runs Android, has a browser... will be a perfect gift as a tablet PC for my loved one."

It turns out that most people who bought one (disclosure: I did not!) see it as a disappointing "knock off" that's slow, unresponsive and basically unusable as anything other than a nice eReader.

They were expecting a device that was just like the iPad but cheaper. Unfortunately (for them and for Amazon) all they got was cheaper not better.

Now, to be fair, Amazon says they are going to push out an over-the-air update in the next two weeks - and they're hinting around that there is a Fire 2.0 in the works. However, I think the damage may already be done. You don't really get a second chance to make a first impression (ummm... no physical volume buttons - really?).

Apple gets this.

Amazon doesn't. RIM doesn't. HP doesn't.

Even though the first iPhone had only a handful of apps (as did the iPad on launch); they got the experience correct. The look and feel. The buttery smooth interface animations. The small, light, yet "solid" feel of the hardware. The aesthetics. The simplicity of use.

Those things really resonate with customers - especially the performance and ease-of-use. Once you've used an iPhone or iPad for any length of time - just try puttering around on an Android phone or tablet...

It just feels like a cheap knockoff of the original in terms of both the interface experience (it's slow and jumpy and hard to click the tiny icons) and the hardware (bit kunky with multiple physical buttons at the bottom).

On the other hand, non-Apple devices are less expensive (on the whole).

Alas, it appears as if no company has come up with the have-your-cake-and-eat-it-too tablet...

What IS a "PC" Anyway?

I've been thinking about PCs lately (as in "Personal Computers" not "Politically Correct"). When us old timers think of a "PC" we generally think of that first IBM PC or the Apple II - with the glowing green screen, and a hip, cool user interface called DOS.

I bet if you asked my kids what "PC" means - they would say "Politically Correct" (hopefully). To them, there is no concept of a "personal" computer because they grew up in a world where all computers are "personal." In their limited experience these computing devices are the default:

1. A computer (or two) in your house
2. A mobile telephone ("but my phone sucks - I need a smartphone")
3. A tablet
4. An e-reader
5. A XBOX 360 (or Wii)
6. A handheld (non-phone) gaming platform
7. Video screen in the car
8. Streaming custom radio station based on your music preferences (e.g. Pandora, Spotify)

We of the older generation didn't have any of these things growing up. Here's our list:

1. A rock
2. A cardboard box
3. Duct Tape
4. 5 Hot Wheels cars
5. Hammer and nails
6. Firecrackers (or some other equally dangerous explosives)
7. Pong (if you were LUCKY!)
8. 8 track tapes - and then cassettes (if you were a 1%er back then)

When "personal" computers came out - it was a revolutionary concept. "A computer in every home" was such a far-fetched idea that it simply boggled the imagination.

Once the PC came out - there was a "war." The war between operating systems that has raged for 20+ years. Microsoft became the dominant player - because they were first with some business applications that went along with the hardware that IBM was selling into businesses.

Apple was trying (sort of) to do the same thing - but they focused less on business and more on education and the hobbyist. The techie. The artistic nerds.

And so the battle "raged" on (not really - because Apple only had 3% to 5% of the worldwide market, anyway). There are passionate "Windows" guys, and passionate "Mac" aficionados - and even a small sect of Linux lovers.

Then, came the iPhone. The paradigm of what computing "should be" and "could be" changed. Forever. A phone with no buttons. A phone that was a slab of glass. A phone that could surf the web. A phone that could contain "apps" that would amuse/help/inform/guide/save-your-sorry-lost-butt... a phone that would (later) include FaceTime video conferencing (hello, Jetsons!)...

Then, came the Android phone.

Then came the iPad.

Then came the Samsung Galaxy Tab and the Amazon Kindle Fire.

Then came the end of the "personal computer."

What's coming next?

There's talk of a Facebook phone running a modified version of Android (yes, a Facebook Operating System... *groan* ) so you could obsessively update your status 24/7. There are already 5 variants of tablets coming in the next quarter - and desktop computer sales have fallen off considerably. Mac OS X for non-phone, non-tablet computers has been re-vamped to include features from the iOS version. Microsoft is jonesing to get their Windows 7 Phone platform going with Nokia.

There are free applications for personal music, personal text messaging, group text chat, group video chat. We can Linkedin our Tublr Facebook Twitter stream with our Flickr YouTube Picasa stream to broadcast our lives in realtime.

We have phones with 5-10 megapixel cameras. That also do VIDEO. That we can upload LIVE at the event!

We can buy books, movies, TV shows with a single click from our phone then watch them on our TV at home - or on our laptop on an airplane.

Yes, the term "PC" ("Personal Computing") is as dead as Flash. Information is becoming a a commodity - sharing our pictures, where we are, what we "like" and what we stand for in a live 24 hour per day, 7 day per week stream - now that is personal computing.

2009 Outlook: Cloud-y

Just as the world was learning about, creating a strategy for, and releasing 1,000 different tools for "Cloud Computing" in 2008 - I predict we'll see more of it in 2009.

Certainly, all the "big" players have announced their strategies - Google, Amazon, Adobe, Microsoft, Salesforce, Sun, etc. - but so far, the thing that's really lacking is some kind of cohesive standard or at least even parity with one another. The big problem is that everyone is convinced they have the "perfect" platform for cloud computing.

I'm sure in their minds they do. They've spent a lot of time and money figuring out how their offering would get some traction in the marketplace and, most importantly of all, gain developer mind share and get people who will actually use it.

They are so vastly different in the way they define things - from Google and their Gears product to Adobe and the Flex/Flash combo to Microsoft's Mesh. It's sort of all over the place.

Some take the approach that they'll just be the host (Amazon), some want to help enable online/offline browser-based apps (Google, Adobe), others think that the platform IS the platform (Microsoft, Salesforce) - and still, no one has come up with a way to actually build and deploy browser-based application in an easy, repeatable, flexible and seamless way (unless of course you count Servoy).

I think we'll see some great improvements in the tool sets and the capabilities of "cloud" vendors. It's just too much of a cluster to try to create (D)HTML and JavaScript applications that run on a server and also on your machine (not to mention all the "moving parts" required. End users want flexibility. Developers want standards-based stuff they can re-use their current skill set with. Bean counters want everything to be free or cheap.

So I think 2009 will continue to be a year of convergence, and in a down economy (at least until Q4) - the pressure of having to do more with less could either help cloud vendors or it might just backfire and cause developers to retreat into "what they know" in order to preserve their jobs.

Only time will tell.

PaaS Gets The Google Touch

It seems that even Google is getting the PaaS (Platform as a Service) religion. At their Campfire One "get together" Google announced an "early technology preview" of a new service they're calling the Google App Engine.

The idea is that Google has determined (like Force from Salesforce.com and Elastic Cloud Computing from Amazon) - that the so-called "last mile of service" - actually getting your application up and running somewhere on the web - can be a challenge.

They've set out to allow developers to get an application up on the web and running - and then scale it up to almost infinite capability - seamlessly and for free (for now). The platform will be limited to running applications in Python (WTF?), and they go out of their way to stress that they are not providing a virtual server or virtual instance of a machine, but rather, they are hosting the developer's application (only).

It comes with 500MB of persistent storage and enough CPU and bandwidth for about 5 million page views a month. For free. For now.

Although they also stress it is not "feature complete" and it's still in development, AND there is no word on what the actual pricing will be once it's out of development, AND they're limiting this preview to the first 10,000 lucky developers to sign up... it's still a very interesting development.

It seems that in the emerging world of the integrated stack (aka PaaS) I think we're going to see LOTS more announcements and competing platforms and standards in order to gain the most developer eyeballs.

Speaking of developers - it just seems to me that Google is slowly becoming the new Microsoft. That is, it has your mail (free), your Office-like apps (free), searching (free), image archive (free), and now also wants to host your applications.

This could be a bug or a feature, depending on how you look at it.

BUG: For all the privacy, head-in-the-ground-scardy-cat-types - it's "big brother." It also smacks of what Microsoft has been doing for years - locking developers into a proprietary integrated stack that is almost impossible to get out of - without completely re-writing all applications ever developed.

FEATURE: If you're a small Web 2.0 company that is looking to get bought by Google (and be honest - who isn't?) - then what better way to have Google become aware of your application and your company and your sustained pageviews - than to host it on Google's own infrastructure? I can almost hear the wide-eyed-we're-going-to-be-rich gear heads coding now...

For the gory details - check out the six (6) videos and the technical specs after the break...