Why Windows 7 "Slate" Tablets Won't Happen

snydeq writes "InfoWorld's Galen Gruman questions the viability of Windows 7 on tablets in the wake of the news that HP will use Palm's WebOS as the foundation for iPad rivals, rather than follow through with the previously hyped Windows 7-based Slate. 'The iPad proved a tablet shouldn't be a portable computer that happened to have its screen always exposed. Even though technical components are shared between the Mac OS and the iPhone OS, the irrelevant Mac OS functions aren't gumming up the iPhone OS, and Apple's development environment doesn't let you pull through desktop approaches into your mobile applications. You're forced to go touch-native,' Gruman writes, adding that, when it comes to touch capabilities, Windows 7 leaves much to be desired. 'Sure, a few Windows 7 slate-style tablets will ship — Asus and MSI are said to have models shipping later this year. But those products will go nowhere, because Windows 7 is simply not the right operating system for a slate.'"

Comments

Thanks you...

[Itninja]

...for linking to the 'print version' of the article. I wept a small tear of joy.

Re:Thanks you...

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't get it. How does the ipad indicate that a windows 7 tablet won't work? The fact that there is a market for a handheld web appliance doesn't obviate the existence of a market for a windows 7 tablet. Especially if Microsoft is able to pull in all the consumer class features across their product lines (nice integration of media/content from Xbox/Xbox 360 to desktop to laptop to tablet to phone.) Right now Apple is riding easy, but once someone comes along who can compete across the board, Apple's "just barely enough" attitude* will start to hurt.

* Examples:
- iPad only able to support nine pages in Safari and when you touch a link that opens a new page it drops one of your existing pages without any user interaction. This is bad behavior.
- itunes choking on iTunMOVI atom metadata that iPhone/iPad/AppleTV have no problem with.
- iPod mode of iPhone having bizarre restrictions on rotated video playback. A movie played directly cannot be rotated, but if you add it to an on the go playlist and play the playlist, you can then rotate the video.
- The sleek looking apple remote that requires the hand-eye coordination of a Street Fighter II junkie in order to operate (select-up-up for chapter selection, wtf?)
- Apple's total mediation of content onto the devices and how you interact with them. It would be nice if you could have multiple libraries, both public and non-public across your iTunes environment.

Re:Thanks you...

[Alphathon]

Agreed; there seems to be a false assumption here, i.e. the is iPad is marketable/sells/works therefore Windows 7 cannot be good on a tablet. This does not follow at all. Unless the iPad has Win7 on it, it CANNOT demonstrate that Win7 is bad for tablets, only that it's OS does work on tablets (or that Apple products sell regardless of functionality).

Re:Thanks you...

[binarybum]

Saying a tablet isn't a full blown computer is not forward thinking. That's like saying 10yrs ago, you're crazy for wanting to use email on your phone, a cell phone has a niche and this is what it does - accept it. Apple loves this kind of thinking.

    Realistically though - who wants to carry around multiple portable devices? Should I use my netbook for somethings, my laptop for others, and my full-blown computer for yet other things? Marketing departments everywhere are screaming YES! but really, a lightweight portable device that runs a similar platform to whatever I sit in front of at work and that has as few limitations as possible will clearly dominate the market at some point. The demand for performance and user interface will always be highest on portable devices - if you are bothering to lug something around with you in a world saturated with computer terminals - the thing you are carrying around better make itself snappy and easy to use or it gets left behind. I'll wait until I get home to check my email rather than lug some piece of junk on the bus that takes one minute to boot, 3min to connect to some sort of network and another 3min to get into my email. Apple has recognized this and windows has not. As soon as someone makes something that incorporates Apple's understanding of the UI but makes a tablet style computer instead of a toy, the idea that your tablet has to be a specialty niche device evaporates - it becomes just another portal to your digital world.

Re:Thanks you...

[node 3]

No the fuck it didn't. The iPad proved that people will buy anything if it's had enough Apple hype ladled onto it.

That's why everyone has an AppleTV.

Oh wait. They don't. People don't buy Apple products because they have an Apple logo, they buy them because they work extremely well. The fact that the products that tend to work the best tend to have an Apple logo says more about Apple and its competition than it does about those that buy Apple products.

I think the new wave of Windows 7 and Android tablets will show that in short order.

Nonsense. Windows 7 tablets are a dead end. Android and WebOS are the only real competition for the iPad going forward. This year, there's no chance Android or WebOS tablets will outsell the iPad, and further down the road, I don't see people buying either over the iPad, as there's pretty much no compelling reason to.

Sadly, breathless hype is a speciality of Apple disciples, and so we'll be hearing about how revolutionary the iPad is long after everyone who actually wanted a real tablet computer has bought one and is happily at home using it.

Only 3-4 million tablet PCs are sold per year. The iPad will outsell the tablet PC this year. Windows 7 won't have any significant impact on this.

Apple's marketing strategy could be best described as "less is more, more is more than that".

No, Apple's marketing strategy is to make sure their products are appealing without marketing, and use marketing as a way of getting people to get into an Apple Store. Once there, their products sell themselves. You can't polish a turd. Apple could not have had the success they have had to date if their products are successful primarily due to marketing, and not for the inherent quality of the products themselves.

Re:Thanks you...

[daffmeister]

They're not selling to Apple fanboys, they're selling to the general public. You and I notice when it shuts down the current process to fire up the web-browser but the average person doesn't notice and doesn't care. They care more about it being easy to use. That's Apple's focus and they only add features when they can nail the ease-of-use as well. That's why they are so successful.

It's not for you. It's probably not for me. But it is for most people.

No current OS is "right for a slate"

[Anonymous Coward]

Hell, I'm having a hard time thinking of what would be right for a "slate". That Courier sure looked nice for what it was designed to do. As a general computing platform... nah

OS designed to be used at a desk with a keyboard, mouse, and unlimited energy? Not so great on a small slate.

OS designed for small handsets for quick and dirty access to stuff on the go? Easier to put on a slate, but still not something I'd want.

Where is a slate with a "SlateOS"? Good for reading, good for watching, good for casual surfing/ computing. multitouch, high end pen input.

Re:No current OS is "right for a slate"

[nutshell42]

Hell, I'm having a hard time thinking of what would be right for a "slate". That Courier sure looked nice for what it was designed to do. As a general computing platform... nah

Microsoft's the Xerox of our days. There's some great ideas coming out of Microsoft Research but the rest of the company's pathologically unable to see anything through to the end.

Tablet PCs. Great idea, it failed because all the devices were half-assed notebooks with a touchscreen tucked on. It failed because MS went all the way to create the best handwriting recognition on the planet and then didn't make it usable in Office (with the exception of one specialized app). It failed because they really needed something like the Courier user interface but instead they built the back-end then scrapped it and instead they're just gonna copy Apple like usual.

P.S.: Oh and they failed because Intel's been unable or unwilling to really improve the Atom in over two years. It's their Tick....Quack model of development. The Quack is them moving the GPU on the CPU die which is less about better performance or lower power and more about killing Nvidia without being quite so obvious about it.

Re:No current OS is "right for a slate"

[Mike Buddha]

I concur. Microsoft already tried the tablet route with the MIDs not 3 years ago, and it sucked, because desktop OS's are too deeply invested in keyboards, mice, and power outlets. I bought a Samsung MID and it was a terrible user experience.

I've thought for a long time now that stylus' are crutches that allow you to use the wrong kind of UI on a portable device. The iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad only serve to reinforce that belief.

Re:No current OS is "right for a slate"

[Draek]

And Tablet PCs failed because I've never, *ever* seen one priced below the level of a high-end notebook. I've heard there's some in the US, if you're willing to spend two days finding one online and then masquerading as a small business to buy it, but in the rest of the world your options are between "sell one kidney" and "sell both".

When an Apple product is the *cheap* alternative, you know you're doing something very, very wrong.

Re:Mobile and Microsoft

[Archangel Michael]

Their vulnerable blind spot is called WINDOWS.

Everything in Windows was designed for mouse/keyboard combination, and there is no touch UI to behold.

Apple's approach is much better, different products, different approaches, and a different UI for Desktop and touch based items.

The reason why touch screens suck so much, is not because they suck, but the application/OS is always bolted on afterthought, rather than separate approach.

This is why I see Apple and Android being the dominant players in these types of devices. And if HP can pull off a miracle and get Palm functioning, it might prove to be a viable third tier option.

I'm afraid the people running Microsoft can't think outside of the whole "Windows" paradigm long enough to figure out that Windows is NOT a touch screen OS, no matter what they try to bolt on.

Re:Mobile and Microsoft

[Lally Singh]

They're working too hard for Windows lockin. If they would just let that go, and let all their smart people develop a *good OS* for *just* *mobile*, with no ball & chain to Windows, it'd be competitive.

Sadly, I think that such an activity is against their DNA at this point.

Re:Doesn't Win7 have a "tablet mode"?

[MBGMorden]

You basically repeated the summary. Yes, it has a tablet mode. Yes, some manufacturers are going to ship with it. Yes, it's going to suck.

As much as I loathe Apple's restrictions, they have the right idea with the iPad. As a device, the entire desktop UI metaphor needs to be rethought.

Microsoft is the type that's always going to throw a stylus and a full keyboard into the mix "just in case", and developers will enevitably end up writing with those in mind because it's closer to what they already know how to work with on the desktop. In short, Microsoft's products in new markets suck because they just don't have the balls to try something REALLY different. They take baby steps when they should be taking leaps.

Archos 9

[riboch]

Archos 9 (http://www.archos.com/products/nb/archos_9/index.html?country=us&lang=en) ships with Windows 7, the older Archos 7 and Archos 5 shipped with Angstrom Linux and they even release the source code.

Re:Been There, Done That

[cowscows]

Microsoft's first answer to every problem has been to protect/promote Windows, even when that wasn't a viable strategy. At first they tried to ignore the internet because it conflicted with their idea of Windows, and then when that didn't work, they came up with IE and tried to use that to tie the internet to Windows. Windows is their biggest cash cow, it's their marketshare dominance, it's the heart of their company. (One big exception to this is the Xbox, which despite not making any money, has at least been successful in terms of marketshare. If the Xbox dropped you into a windows desktop when you powered it up, it probably would've failed pretty hard).

They're finally starting to get it, but at this point, they're years behind.

Re:WebOS

[vivek7006]

You make it sound as if WebOS is slow and bloated, which it clearly isn't. WebOS is built on top of Linux kernel and is specifically designed for use on devices with touchscreens. Android and WebOS are a much better alternative than windows7 for slate devices and OEMs seem to be realizing that now

Re:Mobile and Microsoft

[willabr]

I've been using a Hp tablet PC, windows 7 and OneNote (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Office_2010). This seems to be a very good solution for me, I can use all my desktop data, anotate with the pen, and when not using the One note touch/pen interface I can swivel the screen around and use like a laptop (keyboard etc). I travel around alot and need to gather a bunch of "freeform" data, I can take some pictures, embed them into my documets, write a few notes next to them, send them off to various mail accounts, download some data from the net, and when I get back to the Orfice, connect up to the network and share the whole works whith a few co-workers. I don't really listen to a lot of music or watch movies with it, (although I did spend a week out in boondocks of Wisconsin and the netflix account came in handy) I guess you get what you need and leave it at that, often I think that most of the hype is created to sell advertising copy. When all is said and done, you figure out what you need to do, and then get the best fit.

Re:Mobile and Microsoft

[ozmanjusri]

Their vulnerable blind spot is called WINDOWS.

Sort of.

Actually, Microsoft doesn't have a "vulnerable blind spot". What they have is an applications stack lever. They've never managed to reach into the mobile platforms because their whole business is built on application/data incompatibility with other platforms. The cost of moving from Microsoft is not the loss of Windows. It's the loss of the millions of Windows apps.

That's wonderful for them when they "compete" in the Wintel market, but elsewhere, without the support of that weight of backwards compatible applications, their OS efforts are exposed as bland, clunky and unreliable.

Re:Are you serious...?!

[PopeRatzo]

The iPad proved a tablet shouldn't be a portable computer

Sez you.

I think the iPad proved just how badly we need a tablet that IS a portable computer.

Re:Does anyone praising the iPad actualy have one?

[Mordok-DestroyerOfWo]

For those of us running Linux or that choose not to install the bloatware that is iTunes on our PCs, yes...it is an arduous process. Simple documents such as music and pictures should have the capability to be dragged and dropped as if the iWhatever were just another removable drive.

Re:Mobile and Microsoft

[clarkkent09]

Also, what is it about a multi-billion company that cant find an advertising agency that can make one decent commercial for them? Seems like every single ad by Microsoft is somewhere between bad and embarrassingly bad.

Re:Doesn't Win7 have a "tablet mode"?

[adonoman]

I've had a Windows 7 slate for several months now (combo multitouch/stylus), and it works great for me. Windows 7's handwriting recognition is amazing. Multitouch gestures do leave something to be desired, but given that I have a directional pad on the side of the slate, I generally use those instead. With a full wacom digitizer, I can use photoshop and other pressure sensitive apps. It's bright enough that I can read in almost full sunlight. If I need to type, I just use a bluetooth keyboard. And of course, there's OneNote, which is really the single most important app I use. I've played with a friend's iPad a few times, and it really just seems like a cheap toy compared to what a real slate can do. The real reason PC-based slates haven't caught on (IMHO), is entirely based on the price point. A decent tablet costs $2000 or more - anything less and you're getting a piece of crap. Of course, at $2000, you alienate a very large portion of your potential market. Most PC manufacturers realized this, and stayed from tablets almost completely, not willing to make an expensive device that wouldn't sell, or an overly cheap device that wouldn't be worthwhile.

Apple's marketing magic has managed to create a market for cheap-ass crap slates, by not marketing them as computers, but rather as toys for grownups. They've lowered the functionality expectations, so people won't be disapointed with something barely more than a big cell-phone. I wouldn't even want to try Photoshop on an iPad if it were available. I'd give OneNote a shot if it existed for the iPad, but I wouldn't expect much from it.

Re:Time will tell if Android will succeed

[Toreo asesino]

This is what I love about iPhoners.

"We don't want to be able to choose or not Flash video"

Seriously.

Re:Mobile and Microsoft

[jo_ham]

It's a little different - the ecosystem, yes - vertical integration is their game, but for your data they are opposed to lock-in.

Office apps: documented, open XML format (making it very easy and supported to write converters if you don;t want to use the format itself).
Audio: AAC
Video: H.264
Email: .mbox
Calendars/contacts: vcard/icalendar

They want you using Apple hardware and software, but they make it easy to move your data in and out of the ecosystem as you choose.

Re:Are you serious...?!

[suomynonAyletamitlU]

Let me rephrase it then: the iPad shows with crystal clarity the difference between a traditional GUI and a designed-for-touch GUI when using a tablet.

I'm not aware of any existing full-scale OS--including Linux--where existing applications can be cleanly ported to 'designed for touch' GUI. Therefore, if you want a designed-for-touch GUI, you need a designed-for-touch OS.

Now maybe Android will be exactly what you're looking for, with the right hardware--a full OS/GUI stack designed for touch with the power of a full computer. But so far, nobody else has really done it. I mean, hell, it is a good idea. I like to think that eventually a portable OS with an intuitive interface will merge with the full power of linux scripting, development, etc, on a processor strong enough to really carry the whole setup. However, I don't think that the iPad shows that restricted OS+Touch GUI is a bad combination.

Re:Mobile and Microsoft

[foniksonik]

Apple didn't just package it better. They packaged it so it works on the device. Features don't get used when they are too clumsy. Try to sell me a hand power drill that requires two hands to operate and I'll tell you to suck it. Sure if it was the only drill available I'd try to make it work but I'd drop it instantly the minute I saw a one handed version.

The interface is the tool. Without a good interface it's just a bunch of technology being under used.

Re:Are you serious...?!

[PopeRatzo]

In any event, the iPad proves there's a market for

I guess I'm still surprised that here on Slashdot that there are people who form their preferences for technologies based on how well "they're doing in the market". Maybe it would be different if I ran an electronics store or an advertising agency. The fact that a lot of people are buying iPads might persuade me to buy Apple stock, but it's not going to persuade me to buy an iPad.

Honestly, the fact that people are lining up to buy something has never been a strong recommendation for me, any more than having a lot of advertisements for a particular technology indicates superiority. If it was, I'd be getting my technology news from Wired Magazine.

Re:Actually it does demonstrate that

[SuperKendall]

Is the only possible reason for this that the iPad OS (i.e. iPhone OS) is good and Windows is bad?

Yes, it is. Because it can be done, Windows has not done it through multiple iterations, that is exactly what it means.

Note that the fully qualified statement is really "Windows is Bad - for tablets".

There are other reasons that are also possibly true, but through each failed iteration they all became exceedingly unlikely. Now the essence of the thing has been boiled down, and even HP is fleeing Windows on tablets. If that doesn't complete the picture for you, you are staring too hard at the lines between the pieces and not looking at the image they make...

Re:Mobile and Microsoft

[jo_ham]

What proprietary formats? I gave you specific examples. What proprietary and "lock in" data formats do they use?

What exactly do they "do in software" that restricts users more than Microsoft?

The provide *optional* software registration for OS X and several of their products - the pro apps are all optional registrations, it has nothing to do with activating or validating the installs.

The last bit of DRM on the data formats they use is on movies and TV shows from the iTunes store, which they are working on removing (like they did with music), but cannot do so unless the content providers (namely the movie and TV studios) agree.

They "take advantage" (you try to make it sound like adding commercial weight to an OSS project is a bad thing) of free software and yet still favour data transparency - there is nothing stopping them using a proprietary blob for their formats on the other side (for example, the mailbox format in Mail - they didn't have to use .mbox, or they could have used .mbox but wrapped it up inside an app bundle with Mac-only extensions, or their office formats (iWork etc) could have used a non-documented and difficult to reverse engineer XML format, instead it is well specced and open for anyone to write a full converter.

All you are doing is spreading FUD of your own. Apple are no angels, but your post is nothing more than accusations with no citation. I gave you examples, I expect them in return in a counter argument. Oh right, you don;t have any, you're just making it up.