[djgreedo]

Originally Posted by harryE123

3.5 million people in three months buying and ipad in a market where before they sold 3.5 million units in (what?) 5 years, and all of them not caring about functionality and interoperability? I am sorry but it's impossible to buy that. The reason ms haven't released a tablet is not the ludicrous "being busy cramming features" statement, it's because they are 4 years late with coming up with a decent mobile os

Microsoft are not really a hardware company. They have a tablet OS, it's called Windows, and that is my point. Most tech companies are trying to make tablets with full computer functionality. The technology still isn't at a point where a full-PC tablet is viable (outside of specialty areas, where tablets are actually used a quite a bit), which is why Apple created a less-capable device that gets the maximum out of the current technology limitations.

The reason iPads probably outsell tablet PCs is that consumers haven't wanted tablet PCs. They've been used by business users with specific needs. The iPad is aimed squarely at consumers who don't want full functionality (or more likely don't realise what they're not getting).

, it's because there is internal havoc of competing departments within the company coming up with non functional prototypes such as the courier (which in typical ms style is only leaked to get some vapourware attention away from the competition to be then dismissed)

The Courier was one of dozens of products that Microsoft looked into developing. It's quite obvious why the Courier wasn't completed - there is no market for those devices. Look at how many iPads are being sold compared to PCs or laptops and netbooks - an insignificant amount. There is no reason for Microsoft to enter a tiny market when they are making big money in other markets (mainly software). When the Courier first leaked there was no competition to take attention away from. The only tablets available at that time were running Windows or 'house' OSes.

, wrecking their acquisitions such as danger for kids phones that get canceled after 45 days while selling 500 units, relying on their partners for tablets with windows desktop the very same partners (hp) that after official presentations ditch them and embarrass them, because they don't yet have a good software app store or an ecosystem to integrate it with it, it's about letting others, namely apple, create markets for them and then entering, etc. etc.

HP haven't 'ditched' Microsoft. They make plenty of Windows computers (HP sell more computers than most computer manufacturers), and HP are soon to release the Slate Windows tablet PC. Your fanboyism is showing. In case you're not aware, the 'HP ditching the Slate' stories were fabrications. The Slate is due for release early 2011 running Windows (and also a WebOS version).

HP have been making Windows-based tablets/PDAs for a long time. I have an old HP PDA lying around somewhere. It was the first device I read ebooks on.

It's all that and more but being busy cramming features on their supposed tablet/reader they ain't.

You haven't said anything that points to your statement as being correct. It's quite obvious from the many tablets on the market (pre-2010) that manufacturers have been creating tablet PCs with full PC feature sets rather than dumbed-down products that favour form over function (like the iPad). As I said, this attempt to create full-fledged tablet PCs despite the technology not really being good enough is what led Apple to sneak into the gap in the market. It's not dissimilar to what Apple did with the iPhone. It came out with less features and capabilities than pretty much any smartphone on the market at the time, but what it could do it did well and was easier to use because of its simplistic design (and the first mainstream product to use a capacitive, multi-touch screen I believe).

(It sounded really humorous to me, you saying "better battery life" for apple products and in the very same sentence that these products are for those who don't care about functionality...)

I can do far more with my laptop than anybody can do with an iPad. It has far more functionality. My laptop's battery life is terrible. There is no contradiction between having a good battery life but limited functionality. It's quite an obvious trade-off. If my laptop had less graphics power or a smaller screen or less RAM it would get better battery life in exchange for reduced functionality.

And let me just ask if MS is so good and great, how come they force you to buy from the "terrible" itunes

As I said, iTunes is (in my country) the best place to buy music. Despite being terrible software, Apple simply has the best range of music. That has nothing to do with Microsoft. Microsoft's music products are far better than Apple's, but it is currently too difficult to buy music from the Zune Marketplace because it's not officially available in my country.

, and when someone asks you for you modern mobile os tablet from ms you have nothing to show them? Are they cramming features into their itunes variant too? Boy will this thing be choke full of features after 7+ years of it being non existent.

Your question is a goalpost mover.

You seem to be caught up in the Apple user tradition of assuming that because Apple does something it is the right way to do it. Don't forget that iPads account for a minuscule fraction of the computer market (there are around 1 million Windows PCs sold per day vs maybe 1 million a month for iPads in the period the iPad was brand new an snapped up by a lot of people who were going to buy it regardless of what it was).

There is no pressure for other manufacturers to compete there. I'm amazed at how many Android tablets are hitting the market, but they seem to be mostly from manufacturers who don't sell PCs/laptops/netbooks (e.g. Samsung). It's likely that if tablets hit the mainstream they will be running more complete operating systems like Windows (probably the stripped-down embedded version, which is more suited to a tablet) rather than walled-gardens like iOS. People eventually move to the open, more capable platforms (e.g IBM compatible PCs over Macs, Android is rapidly overtaking iPhone, and Windows Phone will probably regain a few % of market and leapfrog back over iPhone within the next 18 months).

I personally don't care for a tablet OS from Microsoft because if I was to get a tablet PC I would want it to run a full version of Windows. But I personally don't have a need for a tablet (I can't think of anything I would use one for. I have friends with iPads and they don't seem to use them for anything they couldn't do on their phone or a computer more easily. They seem to try to find excuses to use them). I'm not interested in the form factor at this point in time. Part of me wants a tablet because I love gadgets...but in this case I can't think of a single task I could do on a tablet that I can't already do better with my current gadgets.

Microsoft's 'iTunes variant', Zune, out-features iTunes already (wireless sync, music subscription, social aspects, etc.), and is a far better piece of software overall with both function and style, and the latest version of iTunes has cloned one of the major features that Zune has had since launch (the Zune social, laughed at by Apple fanboys in 2006, now copied by Apple and called Ping, though with a lazy, all flash and no substance approach typical of Apple).

Microsoft also of course make Windows Media Player, which is also far better than iTunes, though it's kind of a different beast. Both of Microsoft's media players/managers have been around for a while and neither is bloated (WMP is at version 12 and it runs beautifully compared to iTunes. Zune is 4 years old, though they sort of started from scratch with version 2, and it too runs better with each version even as they add features). iTunes is simply a badly made, badly designed afterthought (though I'm told the Mac version is much better than the Windows version. Apple don't seem to care for the 95% of their customers who use Windows). Why does iTunes require a 90MB download to update? At least they don't require updates to use the store.

But Microsoft's weakness in that area is the amount of product, especially video, which still lags behind Apple quite a bit (my guess is that the content publishers were burned by Apple's shrewd pricing and market dominance, and are pushing harder terms on other vendors now), and especially in the non-US market. That will hopefully change when Microsoft releases Window Phone 7, since those phones all include Zune playback and they are going to be sold worldwide. I feel bad buying from iTunes knowing that some of my money is going to a tech company run by a man who is paradoxically a conservative luddite.