There were several stories today on TechCrunch about upcoming tablets as well as several…shall we say curious…statements from Microsoft executives at their Worldwide Partner Conference in the nation’s capital.  I find much of the conversation and posturing from vendors and pundits interesting and incredulous at the same time.  Sometimes I’m not even sure if they know what the game is that they’re playing.

From a media perspective it seems to come down to whether you’re an Apple fan or someone who wants to see Apple knocked down a few pegs.  I mean one of the dumber comments I’ve seen was by Inc.’s Renee Oricchio who when comparing a proposed Droid tablet to the iPad asked:

“Who’s more business oriented? Do you really see the UPS man having you sign for a package on his iPad? Hmmm… But, I bet you can see doing it on an Android pad. I can. I can see the UPS man using a mashup app between Google maps and his delivery route data, even Google calendars.”

Is there inherently anything different about an Android-based tablet that could possibly make this statement true? Did I miss where you can’t access Google Maps or Calendars on the iPad or where those services couldn’t be built into an app or via a HTML5-based site. I didn’t think her other points made any sense either.

Anyway, not that anyone’s asking me, but I’d suggest that tablet vendors follow this advice:

1. If it’s not shipping within the next 6 months, shut up. Earlier this week there was an “announcement” of sorts from HP about a flexible tablet based on the WebOS from the recently acquired Palm. Personally I think that WebOS is a great platform and that it provides HP a chance to really own the corporate tablet market. But as someone who owns a Palm Pré, just focus on taking the OS to the next level and get out a new phone and the Slate before you start talking about something that won’t ship for 5 years.  Another example of getting too far ahead of yourself was the Microsoft Courier. When it was first introduced it seemed a dream device, and perhaps most notably a very-non Microsoft-like. It seemed like a sure fire hit…except that Microsoft killed it a few months ago and we’ll never know. But of course none of that stopped Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer from telling the world that he’s hardcore about tablet computers at WPC 2010. Ship something…please.

1. Do not focus on specs. It’s a race to the bottom, not the top. This is the classic mistake that many tech companies make, often borne out of a lack of any real differentiation. It’s also the easiest thing to get “beat” on by the next product the competitor releases. Besides, so many companies use the same components and it’s difficult (if not impossible) for customer to really understand what impact the difference in specs really has on the performance and quality of the product they bought (didn’t we learn this about processor clock speed?).  Author Steven Sinek’s latest book “Start with Why” premise is that best, most profitable companies with the most loyal customer base are those that don’t focus on what they do (focusing on product specs) but have a very clear vision, understanding of “why” they created their company and the products they make flow from that vision.

1. Keep usability front and center. This is the flip side of the spec issue. It’s amazing to me that companies learn the lessons of why different mobile devices have succeeded and others have failed. The success of the first Palm Pilot was its simplicity. There were 4 buttons on the device, built around a customized operating system and the apps worked well.  On the other hand, there’s Microsoft’s Windows Mobile OS. Microsoft proffered this shrunken version of the Windows desktop operating system that was ill-suited to the medium, putting the importance of extending the Windows franchise ahead of the needs of the customer.  Well it worked so well that Microsoft finally had to shed the Windows moniker for the launch of Windows Phone7 this fall.

Yet usability is what’s been behind the success of the iPod, iPhone and now the iPad. Neither of the first two products were first in the market, but they redefined the category and thrust Apple into the American consciousness as never before. The iPad is often ridiculed as a giant iPhone or a device for your Mom, but the execution is excellent and it’s the elegance of the interface, designed for the medium has been the key to the success of the device and Apple’s ability to define the segment – so much so that everyone else on the planet is rushing to join the party.

1. The characterization of the iPad as a consumption device is a false argument. I’m not sure that I can’t count the number of times I’ve heard this repeated. Nor do I necessarily believe that it’s true (at least compared to other similar devices) or whether or not it matters.  There’s no debating that many of the apps that were featured in the launch were consumption based, but considering apps like Documents to Go by DataViz, Evernote, OmniGraffle, Wordpress, twitter apps, I just don’t believe it’s true.  And that’s not considering the fact that we’re looking at a product that’s only been in the market for just over 3 months so the best apps are still in the future. And it’s clear that iMovie for the iPad (just released for iPhone4) is in the very near future.  And if you look at this video, I’d like you to tell me that you can’t create on the iPad with a straight face.

1. One last thing…if your tablet requires a stylus, you’re doing it wrong. Bill Buxton from Microsoft Research recently declared at WPC “A device without a stylus is like chinese food without chopsticks”, meaning that their new tablet concepts are going to use a stylus…something not considered on the oft-praised, but not to be released Courier. When will they learn.

There’s going to be a lot of analysis to come, but here’s my first reactions to the news that HP will buy Palm for $1.2B.

For one, I’m glad that Palm is going to survive.  The WebOS received a lot of acclaim as a technology, yet it never took off.  The PDK they release just a few months ago has helped make WebOS a great platform for developers.  But Palm never had the resources to put behind the company and the developer community to really allow Palm to compete on a relatively level playing field.  That changes today.

And let me talk more about how HP will supercharge WebOS’ position in the minds of the developer.  The most important part of this new pairing is HP’s position within the enterprise.  HP will now make a big push to make their new WebOS-based devices (phones and tablets, count on it) in the hands of the enterprise user.  This will encourage developers to embrace the WebOS and start porting apps to it in force in order to reach the enterprise.  This is very bad news in my mind for RIM and Microsoft who finally thought they had something with their new Windows Phone 7 OS to be launched at the end of year.  As they say, timing is everything.

OK, time for a quick take on how this impacts the other players in the industry:

Limited impact:

• Apple: Probably not that much of an impact.  Apple never really targeted the enterprise buyer, although is first in the hearts of many professionals who work in the enterprise.  They have a very loyal, fanatical following and there’s no way that this announcement creates even a blip on the radar.
• Google: Pretty similar story to Apple, although without the fanatical following (except perhaps in the developer community).  Google is still well positioned and also will be greatly unaffected.

Ooh, are they screwed:

• RIM: Even with the impending release of the Blackberry OS 6, they are in for the fight of their life. I truly believe the future of the company may be in doubt for the first time. RIM has lived on the enterprise and has been the defacto standard for many companies. But again I come back to HP’s power in the enterprise and this does not bode well.
• Dell: Their entry into the market is now still-born.  ‘nuf fsaid.
• Microsoft: All of a sudden the fact that the end-of-year release of the new Windows Phone7 OS is a gigantic problem.  HP was not only a large partner for Microsoft from an OS perspective, they’re going to be going gangbusters on marketing an excellent OS and product before the first new Windows Phone sees the light of day (unless its left in a bar by accident).  This impacts not just Microsoft’s phone strategy, but their plans of introducing Windows7 tablets into the market.  Remember that CES announcement of the HP Slate powered by Windows7? No more.
• Nokia: Are they even in the smartphone business anymore? MeeGo is effectively dead and perhaps Nokia becomes a Europe/EMEA-only player.  Good luck with margins in the African sub-continent.

One last thought.  This might also  be good news for Adobe.  Flash 10.1 mobile is scheduled to be supported by Palm’s WebOS,  so this will be another beachhead for them against Apple.
So what do you think the impact will be? Did I miss anything? Please add your thoughts in the comments.

This was the only commercial that my wife and I actually watched as we sped thru the Oscars on DVR.  But I was very disappointed.  Apple advertising usually hits it out of the park, but in my opinion this had no impact. It didn’t spend time really communicating any of the capabilities of the device. It all went too fast.  Apple hopefully will create a number of different spots promoting specific capabilities that they believe will drive consumer adoption. Personally, I still plan on buying one, but if I was on the fence, I don’t think that this ad would have pushed me over.

The only thing Apple has going for it is that their advertising is still miles better than Microsoft’s advertising and Google hasn’t bothered at this point. I must say that I’m appalled at the Microsoft Windows 7 ads. I’ve been meaning to write about this for a while, so as it kind of fits here, let’s go. The Windows 7 ads fails along several dimensions:

• It tries to be a little hip and isn’t.  It’s actually that uncomfortable in-between, just a shade better than Bill Gates wiggling his butt, which may be the all time worst moment in advertising history — or at least Bill Gates’ career.  The whole “I’m a PC”-thing doesn’t have the warm and fuzzies of a Mac campaign if for no other reason (beyond the abject awkwardness of the spots themselves) that “PC” is not a cuddly term the way that “Mac” is.  The “PC” as a brand of sorts represents nearly every over-structured, unfeeling, bland attribute that one ascribes to the factory-like businesses (to borrow a concept from Seth Godin’s Linchpin) that most people work for, and the very same attributes which most people dislike about their jobs.  They may have well featured the uber-boring “Knit Knots” from Disney’s kid-show the Imagination Movers (see pic) in the ads.
• It portrays mighty Microsoft as clueless about how software should behave, giving consumers credit for every good idea that made it to the gold code.  I understand that they’re trying to create a connection to consumers, show that they were listening to what didn’t work in Vista and other prior iterations of the Windows OS.  I just wonder whether a ‘mea culpa‘ ad that said “We listened, and here is your new operating system that we think you’re gonna love” would have worked better and felt more authentic.  But perhaps Microsoft’s general inability to admit mistakes is what truly makes this campaign authentic.
• Lastly, so many of the features that are highlighted are so basic (paraphrasing: ‘I wish it would start up fast and just work’) and seem to echo the benefits of Mac OSX that it could have had a slightly different, yet crushing ending with each of the people featured saying “It’s a Mac”, rather than “I’m a PC”.  Anytime an ad sets up that way, it portrays a fatal flaw, at least in my opinion.

Geva Perry is starting a series called “The Purpose-Driven Cloud” where it appears that he’s trying to address the aforementioned question by evaluating a number of different attributes that are all technology-centric.  It looks like it should be a worthwhile discussion, although it’s mostly written from a developer’s point of view.

But I think his angle is missing some important elements (although in fairness they may get addressed along the way) that are more customer-driven and business-driven:

• Suitability to task: What is the kind of application that you have?  Is it primarily workflow and transaction oriented like an ERP application or are you doing heavy number crunching and using complex algrorithms like a pricing credit default swaps?  Some cloud platforms like Force.com are great for the former, but wouldn’t be good for the latter. And if you are accessing data frequently, cloud storage options like Amazon S3, might not be the right selection.
• Data and Code Portability: When you are deciding what cloud platform to select, you’re not just making that decision for yourself, you’re making it for your customers.  So choosing a platform that doesn’t lock you in to a proprietary codebase or where extracting the data is more of a challenge must be a primary consideration.  Nobody wants to be locked in.  Call it the ‘Hotel California’ effect.  Many companies are wary of the Force.com platform for this very reason, unless they’re building their product in order to take advantage of the Salesforce.com ecosystem.  Also, what kind of protections are you afforded via code escrow?  Think about the challenges that companies who built their businesses — don’t just think about building applications — on Coghead?  For many this was extremely challenging to their business and to some it was fatal.  there’s a financial stability aspect to this as well, so advantage to the mega-vendors like Microsoft, Amazon and Salesforce.
• What Does Existing Code Look Like?: Let’s start out simply: do you have existing code?  If not your choices are much wider.  But if you’re heavily invested in .NET or Java, your choices may be clearer, because the migration path afforded to you will be faster.  And speed does count for a lot.  Here’s one area where Microsoft Azure will have a strong value proposition to existing Microsoft shops.
• Integration: According to Forrester Research, integration is a top concern of clients when selecting SaaS companies.  So does the platform you’re selecting make this challenge any easier on you?  With Force.com, AWS and OpSource Connect you have a lot of existing connectors and modules sitting at the ready that make solving the integration problem easier and significantly reduce the associated coding effort.  Of course there are integration platforms like Boomi and Pervasive Software that you can integrate into your application, but if all else is equal, why not go with the platform that has the integration built in?

What else did I miss?  Please let me know.