Microsoft Promises Greater Flexibility with UMPC Devices in Round Two

[Ekkie Tepsupornchai]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.thechannelinsider.com/article/Microsoft+Preps+Ultramobile+PC+for+Second+Chance/181124_1.aspx' target='_blank'>http://www.thechannelinsider.com/ar...e/181124_1.aspx</a><br /><br /></div><i>"Despite having been on the market only a few months, ultramobile PCs, the keyboard-less handheld computers capable of running Windows XP, have already been panned by analysts and many reviewers. Now they're being targeted by the likes of Sony and startup OQO, who are offering their own diminutive computers for businesses. But Microsoft and partners—the UMPC has been backed by Intel and VIA Technologies—expect to see more diversity in the UMPC space in the near term."</i><br /><br />There's certainly no shortage of UMPC opinions whenever the topic comes up here. Most of you saw this week's post where <a href="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=406900">Samsung blamed Microsoft</a> for the mixed reception of their Q1 UMPCs. Well, in this article, the theme is diversity; Microsoft doesn't want to "pidgeon-hole" UMPCs into a specific form-factor with pre-defined input controls. That sounds great, though analysts still emphasize that prices must come down for UMPCs to really drive open this currently very-niche market. Take a look and let us know if you believe Microsoft's gameplan will move UMPC reception beyond the "mixed" category in round 2.

[Gerard]

If I'm following Samsung's complaint, it translates approximately to 'we're mad at Microsoft for prepping the market for a $500 device, but we can't yet deliver for under $1,100, so Microsoft sabotaged our initial sales.' Is that about right?

Well, um, I followed the pre-marketing campaign Microsoft was pushing with great interest, and as I remember it, there was always a prominent mention of $500 being the *target* price, to be achieved within a couple or a few years. Do I mis-remember, or can anyone back me on this? I am not normally an apologist for Microsoft, and certainly have little sympathy for Bill G. when he sticks his foot in it... but this grumbling about no $500 UMPCs is plainly a load of bull manure. Microsoft nor Bill promised any such thing for this release. If the odd potential consumer was so stupid as to interpret that as 'we'll sell them to you for $500 in 2006' - something they'd have pulled right out of the air, without any documented support for any particular pricing scheme at the time - then that's just pathetic. For tech experts like reviewers to do so is absurd and irresponsible, something smelling an awful lot like typical MS-bashing from the Mac and Linux crowd. Perhaps some funding slipped into some palms from Sony's direction? Not accusing, just smells fishy.


"Originally, the concept of the UMPC was to go after consumers, create a new category and attract them with a low price," said Richard Shim, an analyst at IDC in San Mateo, Calif. But "when we look at the first couple of devices … where's the low price?"

Um, excuse me? Guess he wasn't paying attention to the presentations and just decided to make up history, then attack on a false basis.

I'm rather intrigued by what this 'Haiku' device is to look like. Hope it can show more than 3 lines of text at a time (bah-dum-bum!... boo, hiss). As they're currently made, the 'Origami' line is a bit chunky for carry-everywhere use. My Toshiba e800, with the fattest, 5800mAh battery (giving minimum 15hours of use with wireless or camera cards), weighs in at 320grams (that's 11.3 US ounces). That's the heaviest PPC I've yet used, though the Casio EG-800 came22/06/06 close, and the iPAQ 3835 with a dual-PC sleeve and a couple of cards was almost there too. Still well under a pound. A truly portable computer shouldn't weigh more than a pound, in my opinion. This e800 is heavy enough for its size.

A UMPC with a 6" or 7" screen shouldn't weigh more than about 500grams, maximum. Any more and people just won't want to cart it around much, and will compare it too often to ultra-light notebooks. And they'll be right to do so, as a UMPC lacks (and probably always will) a full keyboard. A pull-out keyboard for thumb use is no substitute for a properly scaled keyboard, not for word processing, email, communications, whatever. It's likely that many users will want a folding keyboard to expand the utility beyond merely 'viewing' Office docs, which really isn't all that important to some of us. For end users, especially, browsing and email are going to be a lot more important in such a device, along with multi-media functionality an ultra-thin self-powered external DVD drive for these things would be nice) and all the usual suspects.

If 2 years go by and the prices are still over $500 or $600, I'll join in the complaining, but only if the feature sets don't increase dramatically. As it stands, people are shelling out $700 and more for unlocked PPC Phones, so what's with all the sour notes on these, much more powerful machines?

[Gen-M]

Gerard - My memory matches yours. I too have been upset with the lousy reporting by the press (even before there were eval units) which miss-set expectations.

If there is any blame for Microsoft here, it is that they did not react to press statements about the $500 UMPC to correct the misrepresentation. MS lost control of the spin. :oops:

[Gerard]

Hm. Microsoft dropping the ball... why does that sound familiar? Oh yeah, like when they made the PPC OS back in 1999/2000, then promoted it almost not at all... and when they did, displayed so little enthusiasm for the impressive computing possibilities as to allow the general public to form the opinion that the PPC was just like a Palm, only not. Kinda dropping the ball on that one still. Well, maybe they'll learn from such mistakes. I'll not hold by breath.

[Outlaw94]

I too was initially put off by the price, but what do you expect a two pound pc about the size of two wallets? Temptation eventually got the better of me and I ordered a Q1, keyboard and case.

I've had the unit for a month now and I love it. While it will never replace computer I use for processor intensive tasks, such as video editing, it is the perfect companion to take with me when I know I'll need a computer.

I recenty took my Q1 to a NASCAR race in Dover and used it too keep up on racing news in the hotel, check my email, off loaded my picturesfrom my Rebel XT after each day, and even did some slite photo editing. The Q1 was perfect for the task and I didn't even notice it was in my bag.

Reading the reviews out there were a little scary as it was on it'sway via UPS. But as I again found out, those reviewers don't know anything. If it were an apple with a 1.5 hr battery life, it would have gotten a perfect score.

[ADBrown]

Well, um, I followed the pre-marketing campaign Microsoft was pushing with great interest, and as I remember it, there was always a prominent mention of $500 being the *target* price, to be achieved within a couple or a few years.

What you're ignoring is the fact that the mention of it being a target price was always extremely glossed over. Instead of talking about what they actually had coming out, they just kept repeating the $500 figure, to the point where those of us who pointed out that this was an entirely unrealistic sum given current technology were treated like we were crazy. Same for the form-factor, battery life, etcetera--All Microsoft and Intel talked about was a pocketable desktop PC that cost $500 and ran for 8 hours on a charge, which doesn't bear the slightest resemblence to what they actually produced. They built up a hype campaign repeating these statements over and over until people expected them to be true, and then they

Microsoft nor Bill promised any such thing for this release. If the odd potential consumer was so stupid as to interpret that as 'we'll sell them to you for $500 in 2006' - something they'd have pulled right out of the air, without any documented support for any particular pricing scheme at the time - then that's just pathetic.

No, they never explicitly said "This is what you're getting right now." But they did, whether deliberately or not, create a picture through the hype campaign that was almost entirely false. Look at the pre-release publicity and see how closely it matches up to what was actually delivered. Hint: it's not the press blowing it out of proportion, or saying things about all-day battery life and $500 price points, it's Microsoft and Intel.

For tech experts like reviewers to do so is absurd and irresponsible, something smelling an awful lot like typical MS-bashing from the Mac and Linux crowd. Perhaps some funding slipped into some palms from Sony's direction? Not accusing, just smells fishy.

Sounds an awful lot like an accusation to me. What, they're supposed to be nice to an obviously mediocre product just because?

Um, excuse me? Guess he wasn't paying attention to the presentations and just decided to make up history, then attack on a false basis.

On the contrary, if you study the presentations, you'll see that the thing that was always emphasized was pocketable, $500 all-day PC. Always.

If there is any blame for Microsoft here, it is that they did not react to press statements about the $500 UMPC to correct the misrepresentation. MS lost control of the spin. :oops:

They did NOT lose control of the spin, they were the ones spinning. That $500 figure came directly from MS and Intel, and they repeated it every chance they got. This was NOT some wild speculation people were indulging in, this was what the companies were pushing out. Does nobody remember that huge hype campaign?

[Gerard]

I do remember the campaign, rather clearly, as I said earlier here. What I remember in part, and what is my cardinal point (which you seem interested in overlooking for your arguments to work) is that Microsoft specifically stated that these figures were targets in the longer term. At one of the most prominent consumer electronics shows Bill G. made a big point of explaining how CPU efficiencies, battery performance, low power screen technology, and ever-cheapening parts cost would eventually deliver on his long term goal of a $500 mobile PC for everyone. What part of that presentation was lost on reviewers and other journalists?

I wanted Origami to launch with a BANG! I don't have a stake in it, but what a cool device, eh? But being realistic, and reading the promotional copy, and watching the presentations, I was left months ago saying (right here, in some old thread) that it'd be at least the second or perhaps third generation of such devices before a usually-broke guy like me could consider a purchase.

[Typhoon]

Anyone who would just do what sony is doing w/their new UXs and sell them for $700 would become an instant winner. What goes into the minds of these designers?

If you think about it...the way the campaign had it was that UMPCs were convienient devices that were also affordable....but now they are just luxury items--overpriced. It doesn't make sense...