Currently, while we talk about the Tablet market only the iPad is trending, which suggests there may not be Tablet a market at all, we are simply seeing the effect of Apples wonderful marketing. Apple has done this successfully before with the iPod, which was the MP3 player market because no other company was able to capture more than 10% of it after the iPod hit its stride.
Learning from this would suggest a competing company shouldnt contest the iPad but the entire idea that Tablets, particularly based on Cell phone processors, are the next big thing rather than a short term blip.
That is exactly what Intel and Microsoft are doing. And this effort has a vastly better chance of being successful than if Intel had focused entirely on creating a competitor to the iPad. Let me explain.
One of the difficulties in competing with any dominant vendor, especially Apple, is in getting around the perception that only the winning company has a good idea.
Currently, while we talk about the Tablet market only the iPad is trending, which suggests there may not be Tablet a market at all, we are simply seeing the effect of Apples wonderful marketing. Apple has done this successfully before with the iPod, which was the MP3 player market because no other company was able to capture more than 10% of it after the iPod hit its stride.
Learning from this would suggest a competing company shouldnt contest the iPad but the entire idea that Tablets, particularly based on Cell phone processors, are the next big thing rather than a short term blip.
That is exactly what Intel and Microsoft are doing. And this effort has a vastly better chance of being successful than if Intel had focused entirely on creating a competitor to the iPad. Let me explain.
ARM, on the other hand, has largely evolved unchallenged because rather than going where Intel was, it went where Intel generally wasnt. It did this first on smartphones and most recently tablets that were so thin, light, and power efficient that Intels parts couldnt compete. In short, rather than fighting on Intels chosen battlefield, the ARM, vendors picked fields of battle that favored their architecture.
Apple bounced off of Microsoft Windows until they repeated the same market approach to the one they used with the iPod and ran at Microsoft with the iPad. Microsofts unwillingness to counter with Windows phone made it virtually impossible for Microsoft to compete with a product in the weight and efficiency class of the iOS and iPad.
Googles attempt to create an iPad clone running Android has largely failed so far because Google is fighting on Apples chosen field and applying a fraction of the marketing skill and funding of Apple. The end result is that Apple is beating both Microsoft and Google soundly.
Users dont want to carry 2 or 3 products -- they want one device. And while Intel and Microsoft are approaching this market differently, their technologies will dovetail nicely. It is worth watching the Windows 8 demo because it is beautiful on the screen. However, those observers on-site at the All-Things-Digital Conference found the move to Office in Windows 8, suggesting that everyone at Microsoft isnt on the same page, which could severely limit the success of this product. This may be the first product that truly bridges the touch screen, keyboard, and mouse, suggesting that future Ultrabooks will be getting touch screens.
However, Apple eats threats like this for breakfast and, I expect, Steve Jobs will address this threat at least partially next Monday at his Keynote. Still, the PC market is Microsoft and Intels to lose and they are the entrenched vendors. If they blur the lines between tablets and PCs by creating a compelling blended product, the iPad could become redundant. This would force Apple to compete with a touch laptop and that would put Apple right back on Intel and Microsofts chosen field of battle, giving them the long term edge.
And that, my friends, is exactly their goal. Now if the two companies can cooperate long enough to realize it.