Dew Point
Comment
dirk.bruere
I think that in the long term the winners will be Apple and Google. I can see ...
hm
There is always scope for more innovation in the iPAD type of product line. ...
One sad prediction for 2011
Don Scansen
1/7/2011 4:50 AM EST
Tablets for the enterprise?
I might be piling on a bit here, but the 2007 launch of the iPhone spawned an insatiable thirst for multi-touch interface on phones. RIM was an established player with a huge following at the time, and probably one of the reasons some analysts thought Apple was insane to enter the market. With the enterprise market so enamored, millions became addicted the "Crackberry."
With several attempts to produce a touchscreen phone, the party line at RIM has waxed and waned, but the main differentiator perceived by BlackBerry fans is the physical keyboard on RIM's mainstay devices. The other point is that the smartphone market – at least in my view – has people that will pay a wad of cash for a phone and those that won't. For those unwilling to part with cash, phones arrive either as $0 phones with their new cell phone contract or they receive them as part of a standard toolkit the first day on the job. Most people who want to part ways with their money buy iPhones. (A significant few buy premium Android devices.) The rest often carry BlackBerry phones.
And it appears to be the enterprise market that RIM is continuing to woo here. If governments and companies start handing out tablets the way they do BlackBerry devices, RIM will enjoy some success with their PlayBook. But it will be limited and probably not enough to get the investment community excited about their prospects. If RIM is avoiding the consumer market, they deserve a lot of credit for sticking to what they know. I just don't see IT managers lining up to order tablets. Of course, many doubted the need for a new computing form factor about a year ago, and I could be wrong.
Despite what appear to be a number of liabilities, the usual suspect is absent from this Apple competitor. The also-rans usually lack the slick feel and polish of Apple products. The Adobe Air platform and the PlayBook OS built around it are excellent. The combination offers functionality that will be lacking in tablets as time goes on including the iPad. The PlayBook also uses a local company's software at the core of its OS. Not simply un-Canadian, but I don't even support my local community. In fact, the QNX headquarters is almost my neighbour (Canuck spelling left as a last ditch effort to stave off the mob).
Beyond the device's fit and finish, the marketing around the PlayBook, promotional videos and websites, is top-notch. Apple competitors' marketing campaigns are often bland. The Apple-Microsoft comparisons don't fly here. Perhaps dealing with some of the negative press and too much pre-launch exposure could have been handled better, but the PR people working on the PlayBook have done an excellent job with the market situation they face. Unfortunately, the success of the iPad has made it an uphill battle. With a rapidly dwindling electronics industry in my homeland, I hope I'm wrong about RIM's venture into the tablet space, but I'm sticking to this one prediction for 2011.
I can see only one potential challenger to the iPad juggernaut. HP will have an opportunity to do something different than the rest of the hordes frantically throwing together tablets to grab part of this new segment. With their acquisition of Palm, HP added a major piece of the puzzle–an excellent multi-touch operating system. I can't speak from experience, but from all accounts, Android offers a credible touch user interface. But anyone can, and does, use it as their device platform. With webOS, HP has a proprietary interface that it can use to differentiate itself from the unwashed masses, possibly even from Apple. And HP has a lot of clout in the retail distribution channel. If Steve Jobs has a fear in the tablet segment, this will be it.
If you notice a hint of bias towards vertical integration, you caught me. I could easily be accused of favoring Apple's continued vertical expansion simply because it cuts against the grain of the trend of outsourcing. But there are some very nice balance sheets floating around C-level in Cupertino to suggest that it's working.
I might be piling on a bit here, but the 2007 launch of the iPhone spawned an insatiable thirst for multi-touch interface on phones. RIM was an established player with a huge following at the time, and probably one of the reasons some analysts thought Apple was insane to enter the market. With the enterprise market so enamored, millions became addicted the "Crackberry."
With several attempts to produce a touchscreen phone, the party line at RIM has waxed and waned, but the main differentiator perceived by BlackBerry fans is the physical keyboard on RIM's mainstay devices. The other point is that the smartphone market – at least in my view – has people that will pay a wad of cash for a phone and those that won't. For those unwilling to part with cash, phones arrive either as $0 phones with their new cell phone contract or they receive them as part of a standard toolkit the first day on the job. Most people who want to part ways with their money buy iPhones. (A significant few buy premium Android devices.) The rest often carry BlackBerry phones.
And it appears to be the enterprise market that RIM is continuing to woo here. If governments and companies start handing out tablets the way they do BlackBerry devices, RIM will enjoy some success with their PlayBook. But it will be limited and probably not enough to get the investment community excited about their prospects. If RIM is avoiding the consumer market, they deserve a lot of credit for sticking to what they know. I just don't see IT managers lining up to order tablets. Of course, many doubted the need for a new computing form factor about a year ago, and I could be wrong.
Despite what appear to be a number of liabilities, the usual suspect is absent from this Apple competitor. The also-rans usually lack the slick feel and polish of Apple products. The Adobe Air platform and the PlayBook OS built around it are excellent. The combination offers functionality that will be lacking in tablets as time goes on including the iPad. The PlayBook also uses a local company's software at the core of its OS. Not simply un-Canadian, but I don't even support my local community. In fact, the QNX headquarters is almost my neighbour (Canuck spelling left as a last ditch effort to stave off the mob).
Beyond the device's fit and finish, the marketing around the PlayBook, promotional videos and websites, is top-notch. Apple competitors' marketing campaigns are often bland. The Apple-Microsoft comparisons don't fly here. Perhaps dealing with some of the negative press and too much pre-launch exposure could have been handled better, but the PR people working on the PlayBook have done an excellent job with the market situation they face. Unfortunately, the success of the iPad has made it an uphill battle. With a rapidly dwindling electronics industry in my homeland, I hope I'm wrong about RIM's venture into the tablet space, but I'm sticking to this one prediction for 2011.
I can see only one potential challenger to the iPad juggernaut. HP will have an opportunity to do something different than the rest of the hordes frantically throwing together tablets to grab part of this new segment. With their acquisition of Palm, HP added a major piece of the puzzle–an excellent multi-touch operating system. I can't speak from experience, but from all accounts, Android offers a credible touch user interface. But anyone can, and does, use it as their device platform. With webOS, HP has a proprietary interface that it can use to differentiate itself from the unwashed masses, possibly even from Apple. And HP has a lot of clout in the retail distribution channel. If Steve Jobs has a fear in the tablet segment, this will be it.
If you notice a hint of bias towards vertical integration, you caught me. I could easily be accused of favoring Apple's continued vertical expansion simply because it cuts against the grain of the trend of outsourcing. But there are some very nice balance sheets floating around C-level in Cupertino to suggest that it's working.
|
|
|
|
|
Navigate to related information
dylan.mcgrath
1/7/2011 5:17 PM EST
Don, that had to hurt. Better keep your head down--your fellow Canadians may be outraged. Not to disagree with your rather sound arguments, but I must add that I just got a brief demo of the PlayBack and (for whatever it's worth), it is pretty cool. The marketing guys really emphasize it's ability to run apps simultaneously rather than freezing the apps not in immediate use. On the other hand, there are literally dozens of these tablets here at CES and I think it's going to take a while to sort the winners from the losers (not to mention overwhelm consumers).
Sign in to Reply
nicolas.mokhoff
1/10/2011 11:37 AM EST
iPad will take schools and homes by storm while the RIM tablet will be the enterprise workhorse. The only other contender that I can see making inroads is the tablet from Cisco. It should be an interesting year with consumable content tablets at home/play fighting it out with paper notebook replacements in the office.
Sign in to Reply
hm
1/10/2011 12:10 PM EST
There is always scope for more innovation in the iPAD type of product line. However, it is missed by major organization except Apple. Apple has quit nessence for introducing more and more innovations. By the time RIM introduces its product, new version of iPAD will be available and will be much more advanced in all aspect. RIM may have difficult time.
Sign in to Reply
dirk.bruere
1/11/2011 3:44 PM EST
I think that in the long term the winners will be Apple and Google. I can see Android/ARM expanding to rival Windows at the expense of MS and Intel. RIM will not have the momentum or resources to compete.
Sign in to Reply