iPad and the brave new world

By Marty Knuckles

In the Datamation article, “Where’s Microsoft ‘s Enterprise iPad?”, Mike Eglan makes some very valid points about Cisco pushing forward with a corporate iPad like device, meanwhile we still are waiting for forthcoming products from Microsoft.

The article opens several good discussion threads.

The first one is: Don't tie the underlying need to a hardware or software implementation. The article suggests that a better user interface and a more human interface are needed. I agree with that. The mouse and keyboard are useful, but they are really concessions to technological limitations, rather than enablers of the use of computing. MPG type interfaces get more at the underlying need for simple, ubiquitous, human style interaction, but those interfaces could be done in even better ways than an iPad or Blackberry or Cius. Just watch an episode of Star Trek and notice the use of the individualized communicator. Given the current status of the wearable computer project, it isn't too hard to imagine a communicator style device that only requires a blank wall to do the projection of a presentation and simple voice commands. I, for one, would rather dictate this reply to your question than to use any sort of keyboard, whether or not that keyboard was implemented as a touch screen on an iPad.

A second discussion thread is: does everyone really need mobile access and does it have to be available 24 X 7? A whole line of interesting discussion opens up, if you look at the statement, "MPG tablets like the iPad will be the dominant mobile device for consumers, and five to seven years from now will be the dominant mobile device in enterprises.". The number of enterprises giving iPad like devices to every employee is quite small. Taking a company like Oracle, you might see iPad like devices in the hands of sales people, field service people and engineers, but you won't see them in the hands of admin types or Finance types. When you get to companies in the $50 M/yr in sales or $100 M/yr in sales, these types of devices are going to be pretty rare as company supplied devices. I'm guessing the "enterprise" side of this thing is going to be fairly small. The consumer side should be where the big money is. However, if a better device comes along (see comment 1 above), consumers are likely to abandon the current devices and current implementations even faster than they adopted them.

A third discussion is: Can a company be all things to everyone in every market and market segment?: I would say, "No". Is Microsoft really supposed to dominate every market segment? I'm sure you'll find people who say, "Yes!", but such a goal is impossible. A company has to have a center and a core value. No company has ever done well with out one. It was interesting to see Digital Equipment and Ken Olson cited in the article. Digital couldn't be all things to everyone and when we tried to move in to spaces that were outside our center and core value, we got killed. As an example consider the DEC PC line. If you are interested in a detailed reads on this idea, then the book, "inside the tornado" by Geoffrey Moore is fascinating as is "from ENIAC to UNIVAC" by Nancy Stern.

A fourth thread is: the mention of "dominating computing for the next 30 years". Given the rates of change over the last 30, it is very difficult to see anyone or any company doing that. Computing history has a lot of carcasses when we turn our heads and look behind us. Also, at this point in time any assignment of preeminence to Apple or iPad or even MPG technology is premature. If we consider past performance, Apple has been innovative just as Digital Equipment was innovative, but Digital failed to survive much past it's 40th birthday and Apple is not the dominant desktop today.

Related Link:

http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/mowi/article.php/3891711/Wheres-Microsofts-Enterprise-iPad.htm