Why Microsoft's New Tablet Will Fail by Geoffrey James
iPad Power Selling Series – We’ve recruited an all-star team of top sales experts to get you excited about selling with the amazing iPad.
Geoffrey James writes the “Sales Source” column on Inc.com, the world’s most-visited sales-oriented blog, which features the best ideas from dozens of sales experts and executives, along with James’ unique take on the business world.
Most sales managers have surely heard about Microsoft’s announcement of the Surface, a Microsoft-branded, Windows-based tablet intended to compete with the Apple iPad. Some may even be wondering whether to hold off purchasing tablets for their sales team until the dust settles.
That would be a dumb move because the Microsoft Surface is doomed.
I’ll explain why in a second, but before going any further, I want to make something perfectly clear: I’m no Apple fan boy. I haven’t used a Macintosh in 20 years. I also know a lot about Microsoft because I covered the firm for about a decade as an analyst at Technology Business Research, and have interviewed numerous Microsoft executives, including Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer.
As announced by Microsoft, there are two primary advantages to the Surface: it’s based on Windows and is a Microsoft product, both of which are intended to make the device more flexible and powerful than an iPad. Microsoft’s press-release says: “Surface is designed to seamlessly transition between consumption and creation, without compromise.”
Unfortunately, both of these advantages are actually reasons why the Surface is destined to be a flop.
Windows is the Wrong Design
The point of a tablet–as epitomized in the iPad–is that it’s easy to use, thus allowing the user to focus on the result they’re trying to obtain rather than the mechanism by which the result happens.
While Microsoft’s product, like the iPad, seems reasonably easy to use on the surface (pun intended), lying beneath is an insanely complex computing environment that requires constant tweaking. The simple truth is that the Windows environment–which was never simple –has become increasingly Byzantine and unstable with each new release.
Windows was designed to run multiple users in a data center, not to host a single-user tablet. That’s why, in order to make Windows work, users end up viewing the kind of multiple-page fix-it instructions that only programmers can understand.
Furthermore, Windows is inherently unstable because applications, including browsers, are permitted to modify the operating system. This not only guarantees the propagation of viruses, but also a gradual “rot” of the software on any given Windows machine.
By contrast, the iPad has a highly stable operating environment designed specifically to run single-user handheld devices.
More importantly, the iPad does not allow applications to modify the operating system, which means that it’s relatively impervious to viruses and is always restored to pristine state when shut down and restarted.
Finally, the iPad has perfectly acceptable document, spreadsheet and presentation tools on the iPad, many of which fortunately do not yet suffer from the “feature creep” that’s turned many Windows apps into a pig’s breakfast of options and menu picks. 
This is meaningful to sales managers because you want your sales team to be focusing on the customer, not spending hours learning how to be junior programmers and to support a data center.
Microsoft is the Wrong Company
It’s been said that “those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it,” an aphorism should probably include “and pay for the mistake.”
The simple truth is that companies who have bet on Microsoft’s ability to launch a viable phone, handheld, or small form factor device have been clobbered by the reality, which is that Microsoft simply doesn’t “get” the basic concept.
Over the years, Microsoft has spent billions of dollars spend on research and development only to create a string of flops, many of which were financial disasters for the companies who drank the Kool-aid.
Microsoft’s sordid history of abject failure goes back to 1996, when they launched “Windows CE,” an operating system intended for what were then called “handheld PCs.” Windows CE flopped and has now become a barely-supported backwater.
Microsoft was also responsible for the Zune, an iPod competitor that barely got on the market share radar and the Kin, an iPhone competitor that was pulled from the market only forty-eight days after reportedly selling only 500 units, despite a massive spending on advertising and promotion.
Since 2001, Microsoft has tried to market the concept of Window-based tablet computers, but these devices, despite being manufactured by established PC companies like Dell and Hewlett-Packard, have gone nowhere.
For years, Microsoft hyped “Windows Mobile,” an operating system for phones, which it then scrapped in favor of the incompatible “Windows Phone.”
This pattern of repeated failures strongly suggests that the handheld/tablet/phone market simply isn’t part of Microsoft’s DNA
As a result, it’s reasonable to conclude the Surface will, like every other product Microsoft has launched in this space, end up as an orphan. And that would be seriously bad news for any sales team that adopts the Surface as a standard.sn’t part of Microsoft’s DNA.
By contrast, there’s not the slightest chance whatsoever that the iPad is a dead-end, because it’s already established itself as a market leader.
Moreover, there are dozens of sales-oriented applications available for the iPad, most of which are far easier to use then the Windows-based counterparts because they’re designed to work on a tablet, rather than on a PC trying to pretend it’s one.
Because of this, sales managers who want their teams to remain competitive would be well advised to base their technology strategy on the iPad rather than the train wreck that the Surface will almost definitely turn out to be.
To get column updates from Geoffrey, sign up for his weekly “insider” newsletter or follow his @Sales_SourceTwitter feed. His newly published book is Business to Business Selling: Power Words and Strategies From the World’s Top Sales Experts.
@Sales_Source
My Google Profile+
Disclaimer – All data and information provided on this site is for informational purposes only. Red Funnel Consulting, LLC makes no representations as to accuracy, completeness, currentness, suitability, or validity of any information on this site & will not be liable for any errors, omissions, or delays in this information or any losses, injuries, or damages arising from its display or use. All information is provided on an as-is basis.
The opinions expressed by the Guest Bloggers on this site and those providing comments are theirs alone, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Red Funnel Consulting or any employee. Red Funnel Consulting, LLC is not responsible for the accuracy of any of the information supplied by the Guest Bloggers.
6 thoughts on “Why Microsoft's New Tablet Will Fail by Geoffrey James”
Leave a Reply
Case Study: Solo Foods
Case Study: NEB
White Paper: Adding the iPad to Your Sales Arsenal
White Paper: 5 Reasons to Unleash the Power of the iPad
Really interesting perspective, Geoffrey. I’m intrigued by the Surface because our IT department is a bit anti-Apple and I think tablets could be a great tool for the sales team. Looking forward to learning more about the Surface and watching this play out.
IT groups dislike Apple because 1) they have to learn something new and 2) there is less reason to have an IT staff, and 3) they want to keep control of computing resources, which is easier when people are dependent upon IT to make their systems work. In other words, IT groups now favor Windows (which they used to hate, back in the character cell terminal days) because it keeps things needlessly complex and unstable.
I agree that Surface was poorly played, especially considering the price they had to pay with their OEM partners. I don’t even think the software issues are insurmountable. However, I think it’s either vaporware or a confused, politically generated product, ignoring a potentially huge market. (Here’s what I had to say about it on my blog, saying that essentially Microsoft should have positioned this as a the “Tablet for getting things done”, with real software and real hardware demos: http://www.mimiran.com/proposals/how-to-sell-microsoft-surface-tablet-for-getting-things-done/)
Hey, let’s not forget the fact that the device failed during the debut demo:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1zxDa3t0fg
I love you and your work but that’s the craziest thing I’ve ever heard. At least in the top 10. There’s really no competition if you think about it. This type of evolved computing device is set to replace laptops and iPads. Let’s face it, the iPad is a book reader with Internet. The surface is pretty much a perfect mix of the two, PLUS the ability to write with a pen device. Like a real stylus and not a giant club device without sensitivity and dimension. So there goes the need to carry all of the above in your carry-on and briefcase, even a writers trusty paper and pencil.
Ps. Most demo’s fail, because they’re rushing to get the product done. If you have no faith in Microsoft’s output, you should read up on Windows 8. And this is coming straight from a girl that owns all Apple stuff.
Sorry, but I disagree for a number of reasons.
First, the iPad is much more than a tablet with Internet. It is a gaming device, a media viewing device, document/spreadsheet/presentation device, etc.
Second, using a pen device to “write” on a tablet is a non-starter, as anyone who had ever tried to actually do this knows. It’s impossible to write accurately or easily without the tactile feedback of something moving over a surface with some resistance (i.e. paper).
Third, the “analysts” who review Microsoft operating systems are paid by Microsoft to write nice things about them. Every time Microsoft does a new operating system, the analysts ALWAYS say “this time Microsoft got it right.”
Fourth, I have no idea who would bother to carry a laptop and an iPad, when you get the same functionality (other than very hard core document creation) with an iPad and ultralight keyboard.
Fifth, the business model is all screwed up. I didn’t mention this point in the post, but the idea that Microsoft expects other vendors to make a device that’s directly competitive with the same device from Microsoft is crazy-thinking. Especially when ALL the PC vendors have been burnt by previous versions of Windows-based tablets.
Finally, and most importantly, either Windows 8 is backwards compatible or it’s not. If it is backwards compatible, then it carries the baggage of kludges that go back, well, to the days of MS-DOS, including the inherent instability that’s built into the Windows architecture, which allows applications to modify the operating system. If Windows 8 is NOT backwards compatible, then it loses the only market advantage that it’s got, which is backward compatibility to an existing de-facto standard.
The Surface is a dead duck.
P.S. (No, most demos do not fail. However, you are correct that demos are more likely to fail when a company is “rushing to get the product done.” Products that are rushed to market are usually low-quality and full of bugs, which means the product launch starts on a sour note… with dissatisfied users. Which I guarantee will be the case with this turkey.)