Origami CNBC video

Watch it here. Open the link in IE, doesn't like Firefox. (via Hugo Ortega)

Okay, so my first thoughts...

"Under $1000"? Them's those real US dollars. So let's say it's about US$900. That's about $1400 AUD. For a slate with no keyboard. As I said to Hugo on the Productivity Show last night, I love my Tablet PC, but for me, the keyboard is a MUST HAVE if you are thinking of using it as a primary productivity device. If it's just for watching videos and listening to music and surfing the net... $1400 sounds like a lot of money. I bought my Acer Tablet PC for less than that. With a keyboard. Yeah it's bigger. But big screens are good... right? Sure, I'd like a PC in my pocket. That's why I've had a Pocket PC for the last 8 years. Yeah I'd like a REAL PC in my pocket. But for $1400, I'd want more than just a slate...

Comments

[AdamBomb]

you're trying to shoehorn how you'd use an origami device the way you use a computer today - which is wrong. Origami is about opening up new computing paradigms. The idea is to create different devices that focus on a specific usage scenario - a gamer, a soccer mom, etc., and give a good experience for that usage scenario, and limited functionality in others.
If you don't see how you'd use origami, it's because you're not in the target market. I can see my wife or my son using an origami device, but I don't know yet if I'd use one.

[Cameron Reilly]

Ok Bomb, I can see that in concept. But what ARE those scenarios? A soccer mom is going to want something amazing is she's paying $1400 Aussie. But if prices come down... yeah I can see it.

HOWEVER.. this is the same "scenario" pitch that MSFT used when it launched the Tablet and would you agree that they completely blew that? I was reading an interview with Danny Beck from two years ago when he was the WinXP product manager in Australia and he was predicting that by 2006, 50% of all laptops sold would be Tablets.... ah no.

In recent years, MS has become very good at high level pitches for these things but isn't driving them home. I suspect one reason is that they expect their partners (HP, etc) to fill in the gaps for them, but that never happens. MSFT need to pull their pants all the way on and drive these things like they did in the old days. When MSFT launched NT and SQL, they didn't wait for partners to sell it - THEY DID IT. They invested in the people who could evangelize and drive these things home in the marketplace. Today they are reluctant to make such investments and prefer to say "oh the partners will take care of it".

[Tony]

Maybe Bill Gates should ask Steve Jobs to become a partner of Microsoft. Maybe things will get done then :P

Those days when Microsoft were evangelizing were when you were there Cam and stopped when you left?