Tuesday, June 26, 2012

Should Hardware companies pay MS not to make hardware?

We've all heard about the Microsoft Surface tablet and how it's going to be the iPad for Windows. User are eagerly waiting for it. Tech journalists can't wait to get their hands on it and test it. About the only people who aren't jazzed are the other Windows tablet makers. What can they do? Say something against it? and risk their Windows license cost go through the roof? (no, Microsoft won't do that).
What's going to happen if the Surface tablet becomes too popular? Does anybody think Microsoft will say, "Ok, well make something that will sell like hotcakes and then stop selling it after everybody has bought one." Well, HP doesn't count. That WebOS tablet thing was a fluke. Nobody could sell a tablet for $199, right?
I think the only way to stop all this is to turn the tables on Microsoft. Remember at one time, Microsoft paid hardware vendors to come out with hardware the worked only with Windows. They called it a "development fund" to help them cover the cost of developing hardware for Windows. The hardware makers should do that in reverse. Get together and offer Microsoft a "software integration fund" to help cover the cost of Microsoft working closely with them to get the right experience on the tablet. The purpose of MS Surface is the tablet is because none of the hardware makers so far has been able to "make the right tablet" or "provide the best experience". If that's the case, the hardware makers have a case to offer a "consulting fee" to Microsoft to advise them on what is the best experience for Windows tablets. Of course, the condition for the consulting fee / software integration fund is the delay of the Windows Surface tablet. It'll come out after the hardware makers come out with theirs or.. maybe not at all, if Microsoft chooses to. Who knows?