關(guān)鍵字：Windows 8 surface平板
你選擇在你的OEM客戶推出產(chǎn)品前的幾個(gè)月，就搶先發(fā)表你的 Windows 8 平板電腦。但，這可不是什么有勇有謀的舉動(dòng)。
多年來，PC廠商都亦步亦趨地跟隨著你的系統(tǒng)需求，站在你那一邊支持你，長久以來他們一直在付出。而當(dāng)你認(rèn)為你已經(jīng)能開發(fā)出實(shí)體產(chǎn)品時(shí)，你就趕在他們前面，希望能分到5%的毛利率！
我猜，很少有人會(huì)公開說些什么，因?yàn)樗麄兌寂聜胶湍阒g的合作關(guān)系，所以我會(huì)說，他們只是有口難言罷了。
你可能已經(jīng)從 Google 的經(jīng)驗(yàn)中得到教訓(xùn)。和一家或兩家 OEM 業(yè)者密切合作開發(fā)殺手級(jí)產(chǎn)品，藉此展現(xiàn)你旗下軟件的創(chuàng)新特性。也或許，并沒有任何創(chuàng)新的功能可以炫耀。
一位消息人士對(duì)我說，他聽到Acer工程師將之形容為背叛。“微軟希望為每套Windows RT設(shè)備收取80到90美元版稅，但卻同時(shí)推出標(biāo)示著其商標(biāo)的平板電腦機(jī)──這是不公平的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)，而且可能會(huì)加速更多裝置采用Android，”他說。
他同時(shí)表示，ODM公司覺得他們浪費(fèi)在Windows 8平板上的投資，而現(xiàn)在，他們不得不再度轉(zhuǎn)移焦點(diǎn)。
如果我是移動(dòng)PC制造商，我現(xiàn)在就會(huì)打電話給Google的 Android 團(tuán)隊(duì)，去建立密切的合作關(guān)系。
臺(tái)灣的PC廠商已經(jīng)不止一次告訴我，他們認(rèn)為Android要比Windows 8更適合平板計(jì)算機(jī)。因?yàn)樗敲赓M(fèi)的，而且它已經(jīng)擁有了完善的使用者基礎(chǔ)，以及應(yīng)用軟件生態(tài)系統(tǒng)。
微軟 Surface 平板看起來并不令人驚艷。它看起來很像是一種“me-too”系統(tǒng)。我看不出任何能超越蘋果 (Apple) iPad 之處。至少三星(Samsung)還能用類似iPad的 Galaxy 平板快速切入市場(chǎng)。
當(dāng)我從紐約時(shí)報(bào)讀到在洛杉磯記者會(huì)上，微軟甚至并未回答任何有關(guān)與 OEM 沖突的問題時(shí)，我非常驚訝。
“當(dāng)被問及 Surface 平板是否會(huì)損害與OEM之間的關(guān)系時(shí)，微軟Windows部門總裁Steven Sinofsky輕推記者，讓他轉(zhuǎn)向 Surface 平板，并說：‘去學(xué)些東西’。”
也許有一天，微軟將會(huì)從平板業(yè)務(wù)獲得龐大利潤。但他們要付出什么樣的代價(jià)？
Et tu, Ballmer, or M’soft’s stab at tablets
Rick Merritt
Shame on you, Steve Ballmer!
Pre-announcing your own Windows 8 tablet a few months before your OEM customers are ready to roll out their own products. That’s not gutsy, it’s just gross.
For years, PC makers have slavishly followed your systems requirements, jumped on your bandwagons (like Windows for Pen Computing), and this is their payment. When you think you have a solid product you rush to get in front of them hoping you can steal their sub-five-percent profit margins.
I suspect few will say anything publicly for fear of hurting their relationships with you, so I will say what they cannot. This is bad business.
You could have taken a lesson from Google. Work closely with one or two OEMs on a killer product that would show off the novel features of your software. Perhaps there really aren’t any novel features to show off.
One source told me he heard Acer engineers describe this as a betrayal. “Microsoft wants to charge $80 to $90 royalty per Windows RT device while bring out this tablet under its own logo—it’s unfair competition which will accelerate more adaption of Android,” he said.
(In my own interviews, I was told the per unit cost of a Windows license for OEMs is about $45.)
He reports an ODM company saying they feel they have “wasted all the investment [on a] promised [Win 8 tablet] business [and] will have to shift focus again.”
If I was a mobile PC maker, I would be on the phone to Google’s Android team seeking a tight partnership.
Taiwan’s PC makers have told me more than once they see Android as a better road to tablets than Windows 8. It’s free and it already has a well-established user base and ecosystem of apps.
The scant information on the Microsoft Surface tablet is unimpressive. It looks very much like a me-too system. I fail to see any compelling differences over the Apple iPad. At least Samsung was quick to market with its iPad-like Galaxy tablet.
Nvida was quick to note its Tegra powers the Surface. Frankly, this is one design win I would try to distance myself from.
I was amazed to read at their hastily called LA press conference, Microsoft did not even answer questions about OEM conflicts. According to the New York Times report:
"When asked whether Surface would damage those ties, Steven Sinofsky, the president of Microsoft’s Windows division, gently pushed a reporter in the direction of a stand of Surface tablets and said, 'Go learn something.'"
Maybe someday Microsoft will reap great profits from a tablet business. But at what cost?
The innovation in the Surface is mainly in its chutzpah.
移動(dòng)設(shè)備訪問
