As suppliers introduce different sizes of hardware and
pile functionality into ever smaller devices, are they meeting user
demands, or simply creating the next gimmick?, asks Clive
Longbottom
We seem to be going through the form factor wars again – not
only do we have desktop-replacement laptops, laptop-replacement
tablets and tablet-replacement PDAs, but we have the phone handset
trying to take the multi-media market by storm, and Microsoft’s
Origami machine trying to be all things to all people.
But are the suppliers understanding the issues, or are they just
struggling and trying to create short-term markets to bolster
revenues?
Common sense would predict that a machine that brings together
as much functionality as possible would mean fewer devices to
carry, and therefore fewer devices that can be lost, that need
information synchronisation, management and so on.
However, the idea of trying to watch streamed television or
films on a two-inch screen does not grab me, nor does a small PC
capable of running office applications but with a battery life
measured in minutes.
It is not as if we have not been here before – try persuading a
heavy mobile phone user that a PDA or Blackberry phone is cool.
They might decide to use a PDA or a Blackberry as a data device and
for its pose value, but standing with a slab of hardware held to
your ear is not seen as cool by the Armani-suited sales guys out
there.
Try looking at in-depth, business-important spreadsheets on a
PDA and you will rapidly decide that a laptop may be heavy and a
pain to carry around, but at least you can get some work done. And
make yourself dependent on the laptop for voice over IP telephony
and you will suddenly decide that a standard GSM mobile phone has
greater coverage, and does not take three minutes to start up.
That we have massive redundancy of function across the multiple
devices we use is neither here nor there. That we could combine
radios to save battery life, or we could use specific input/output
devices using ultra-wideband technologies to increase flexibility
just does not seem to count.
Users have decided what form factors suit them – whether this be
a bar-shaped or clamshell mobile phone, the standard PDA format, or
a small or large format laptop.
For anything else to create a sizable market will be difficult
to say the least – and I think that this is where Microsoft has got
it wrong with Origami.
To me, this is the Ford Edsel of the computer world – on paper,
it seems to do what everyone wants it to do. In practice, ask
anyone who has tried one, and once they have got past the “wow!”
factor, the response seems to be, “Yeah, but what does it do for
me?”
As the search for the killer application for different form
factors and different wireless technologies goes on, the suppliers
seem to have missed the point that this is not what the user is
looking for. It is a killer cocktail that is required: a range of
offerings on a specific device that makes sense.
Sure, let’s pick up our e-mail headers on the phone – but if
there is an attachment that I need to deal with, I will start up my
laptop, thanks. Stream me previews of films, but then allow me to
subscribe to have them streamed to my laptop/desktop when I have
more time at home or in a hotel. Allow me to use VoIP if I have my
laptop turned on, but let’s combine the billing for VoIP landline
calls with my mobile phone, please.
It is not the form factor that firms should be fighting over, it
is the offer. Suppliers should be looking at making sure that the
functionality package is form-factor-agnostic – that is the way to
success.
Clive Longbottom is service director at analyst firm
Quocirca