Microsoft is giving more breathing room to XP on low-cost PCs by extending the time that it will make XP Home able to OEMs for these devices through at least June 30, 2010. It refreshing to see this, although in my mind Microsoft is not going far enough to address the challenges at hand.
There’s no doubt that Microsoft has missed the boat when it comes to low-cost PCs, MIDs, and even its own UMPC. It’s in a catch up game. Microsoft is getting challenged on the low end by the hardware and cost frugality of Linux and on the coolness side by Apple’s iPhone. Lots of body punches. No knockouts, just draining body punch after body punch. As a tech enthusiast and long time user of Microsoft products it’s hard to watch. (But I know time will heal all wounds, as I sit here typing this on my Mac Pro after reading about the announcement on my iPhone. Heh.)
It’s not that Vista is terrible on these machines although in some cases it’s sluggish, it’s that these low-cost systems simply often don’t have the drive space to hold the larger Vista. But that’s only part of it. Solid state drives, for instance, will get bigger. The bigger issue is that Vista is biased towards the desktop and large displays. XP is for that matter too, but not as bad (no sidebar, for instance). Yes, Vista can be set up like XP, but it would need to be stripped down to really make a good comparison. I’m not sure if Microsoft would want to take the engineering and test time to strip Vista down though.
What I hope Microsoft really understands is that it’s not simply a matter of XP over Vista. The user experience matters too and simply giving the nod to XP doesn’t address this issue. As Linux-based MIDs and low-cost PCs running optimized shells are going to demonstrate and the iPhone excells at, a good OS needs a good user experience. XP is so-so when it comes to small displays. For instance, some windows need at least 600 pixels high or they won’t fit. OEMs have addressed this by bumping up the display resolution. But then everything is itsy bitsy. Fine for young eyes, but not mine. Actually it’s not the number of pixels that’s the real issue, its how the pixels are used. Tiny buttons are hard to target, for instance. And frankly, small displays should have a different shell. It’s fine for Windows Explorer to be an option or the desktop to be front and center, but that’s not the best user experience. And then there’s the whole issue as to whether everything should be mouse and keyboard oriented on small devices. Try an iPhone and you’ll see.
Here’s one other thing that’s troubling me about this whole announcement: Mary Jo Foley is reporting that the XP extension will not apply to “higher-priced and more robust UMPCs.” Wow, this is a misreading of the UMPCs space. So soon Microsoft itself forgets that the whole idea of the UMPC was to build a low-cost device. Further, these new low-cost PCs are essentially UMPC-like systems with a keyboard and without touch and for lower price. They are UMPCs. I’m hoping that this is just a bit of miscommunication. UMPCs are supposed to be low-cost devices and they will run on low end hardware. The OEMs messed this all up, which is why in part the sales have been lackluster. (Although I think it’s also because the user experience wasn’t all the inspiring either.)
One more thing: Microsoft I’m sure is focused on competition along the OS front–both from Linux and OS X–and the web too for that matter–but it’s important to not lose sight of Intel. Intel really defines what the industry does, in large part because it makes the processors and chips that many systems use. Here’s the thing, for the last year or so and at least the next year or two Intel’s roadmap is about “portable” processors, not power house notebook systems. In other words, I would not be surprised to see the growth on the low-end systems to outpace most others–simply because this is where Intel is putting its energy. Microsoft I assume knows this and I expect the next version of Windows will address this…maybe? If not, we’ll be hearing the slam of more body punches.
Now here’s the part that really erks me: it appears from Microsoft’s announcement that XP Home addition is all that Microsoft is giving extra time for. But what about ink? There’s no Tablet PC edition. So in other words, the low-cost PCs, which are great for young students on up, which is exactly where ink makes a lot of sense, won’t have it built in. Amazing.
Now here’s the real kicker. There is a way around this: the browser. Using Silverlight and web services to handle recognition, you can build ink enabled applications for XP Home. So essentially Microsoft is saying no to ink and yes at the same time. It doesn’t make sense. (We have yet to see how good Silverlight will be on Linux systems though. Depends on what Novel comes up with.)
Microsoft needs to think a bit harder about its commitment to ink and the ink ecosystem. It appears that it’s getting too defensive, trying to separate out its value at the high end. Come on, what about the kids? If for no other reason, Microsoft should be doing the right thing to make the education experience better for students–no matter what the lost revenue at the high end–which is a stupid argument in itself, because ink is essentially given away for free in several higher versions of Vista and under marketed across the board at that.
If I were Microsoft I’d flip this whole notion of technology exclusivity and license the heck out ink and its top-notch recognition. Why not? Go make some money from it. Get it out there. People will know that it comes from you. Isn’t that a good thing? Make some money. Get some exposure?
So I’m sitting here, shaking my head, realizing that as a Tablet developer I have to keep thinking beyond Microsoft’s immediate strategies. I hope they change or at least Microsoft blows me away with the next version of Windows–because if it doesn’t my head and shoulders are going to get mighty sore from shaking and shrugging and squinting my eyes every time–BAM–there’s another–WHAM–body punch. Ugh.
Update: Not everyone agrees with the idea of extending XP. Joe Wilcox blogs that he’s been advocating to shutdown XP for awhile in order to boost Vista sales.
