One of the worst things happened this year in the Ultra-Mobile PC World. Intel could not figure out how to market the UMPC platform and shifted terms to Mobile Internet Devices (MIDs).
What went wrong for Microsoft?
1. Microsoft screwed with the UMPC Community. After the Ultra Mobile PC launch, Microsoft competed with most webmasters to build a site about the UMPC. This type of action does not initiate competition but slows progress. Microsoft employees did not understand the difference between supporting a community and buying a community. This continues to this day with an Origami site competing against other UMPC sites. Once more, this lack of support led some select sites to change emphasis or abandon posting altogether.
2. Along this line of thought, potential consumers became confused. Is it Ultra-Mobile PC, Ultra Mobile PC, or Origami? Microsoft created confusion by registering a domain with the name Origami and kept referring to the Origami instead of UMPC. Sure sure. There was an attempt to justify the names by referring to software v. hardware. The attempt was lame.
3. Microsoft abandoned the Tablet PC and UMPC teams - just like most observers decided they would years ago. Because the enthusiasts were too busy and being too nice to Microsoft they missed the story.
In fact, many tech enthusiasts still do not see the great pull-out that happened over the last year. With the huge reorganization at Microsoft - Gates is gone - and so too is the dream of ubiquitous handwriting on Mobile Systems. No one from Microsoft is an evangelist for Tablet PCs and UMPCs. No one stands up and talks about the Tablet PC or UMPC as if there is any need to discuss the product**.
4. Apple launched the iPhone and showed everyone that there is mass-market appeal. You just have to know how to present the product. Unlike Microsoft, Apple did not take old technology and slap a new name onto it.
What went wrong for Intel?
1. Intel wants to sell processors. The original UMPCs were old hardware and Intel wanted to discuss new processors. More important, VIA-based UMPCs hit the market with the most penetration and scared the heck out of Intel.
2. Intel did not focus energies and clarify their position on Ultra Mobile PCs. While many employees were shifted to the category, leaders failed to provide a clear mission. Intel needs to think 5 years, 50 years, and 100 years in advance. The UMPC was almost a backwards thought process for Intel.
3. Intel did not invest in the UMPC phrase. For example, fresh content on the Intel UMPC.com site does not exist, with the same two stories showing since April*. Maybe someone should buy that site and fix it.
Sitting back and considering the events over the past six months, one can easily get all excited over the silly drivel about Intel MIDs and Microsoft UMPCs. Neither company is coherent. There was great hope but like all Microsoft events over the past few years - hope was a four letter word quickly morphed into profanity.
Yet, the Intel MID has momentum. While Microsoft sleeps - Intel pushes forward. This formula is a great mixture for Intel to wash away the UMPC and work with manufacturers to build competitive products to the Apple iPhone.
No matter what your opinion, one message is clear. people love their iPods and iPhones.
*This site was no different because of school work. Yet, my love for the UMPC has grown since starting this site.
** What will happen when Dell figures out they waited too long to enter into the Tablet PC and UMPC market?
</img> </img> </img> </img>



More...