Government // Enterprise Architecture
Commentary
4/9/2013
03:29 PM
Michael Endler
Michael Endler
Commentary
Connect Directly
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%
Repost This

Windows 8 Tablets: Why Microsoft Must Slash Prices

Microsoft can maintain its market dominance with Windows 8 if it tries something not in its normal playbook.

When consumers evaluate personal electronics purchases, one principle can generally sum up the experience: good, fast, cheap -- pick two. It's a tried and true business formula, a twist on the notion that customers get what they pay for. Microsoft needs to erase that two-out-of-three strategy from its tablet playbook.

With the first wave of Windows 8 tablets, consumer mileage has varied on the "good" and "fast" fronts. "Cheap," though, has rarely been a blip on the radar, least of all for Microsoft's Surface tablets. With both Windows 8.1 (Windows Blue's current nom de jour) and a new spate of devices on the horizon, this needs to change. Redmond needs to rush satisfying tablets to market -- and they can't just be competitively priced. They need to be downright cheap.

Here's the reasoning: The Surface RT, decried though it's been, is actually a pretty nice device. If Microsoft had charged $250 for the tablet and maybe another $50 for the Type Cover, I probably would have bought one at launch, and I suspect I'm not alone. At that price, I'd have been willing to remain patient while Microsoft developed its lackluster app library. Yes, the iPad would have offered more variety and polish, but the Surface RT would still have been a decent media-viewing tablet that, with its watered-down version of Office, would have featured better content-creation tools than anything on iOS. That's enough use to justify a couple hundred dollars.

[ How much does touch matter? Read Windows 8 Doubt: 3 Ways Touch Won't Help. ]

Unfortunately, the Surface RT costs nearly twice as much as I am willing to pay. Ultrabooks and even the Surface Pro -- the most thought-through Windows 8 device to date -- are no better. Newer, faster and more energy-efficient models that run on Intel's next-gen Haswell processor are just around the corner, so why should someone buy an expensive item today when a better, and perhaps less costly, alternative is only a few months away?

Windows 8 and Windows RT have struggled, in other words, due only partly to their UI awkwardness, mediocre apps and various rough edges. Cost has been the other culprit; there's a price beyond which customers simply aren't willing to deal with learning curves, impatience and other frustrations that might be more palatable with cheaper devices. For many consumers, the Windows 8 devices evidently cross that discouraging cost threshold, and the result has stuck Microsoft in a holding pattern of bad press.

Microsoft seemed to assume that Windows 8's dual identities would be an obvious game-changer, and that Windows RT's native Office app would trump the iPad. Had Redmond been correct, the story would be different. People deal with learning curves if the payoff is a premium experience. But it's become clear that most customers have decided Windows 8 asks too much while offering too little.

Asking less of the consumer would not only help Redmond stimulate adoption, but also help address its other lingering problem: apps. Where the user base goes, developers will follow. According to MetroStore Scanner, the Windows Store currently has around 57,000 Metro-style apps, and app submissions, which had been on a downward spiral since launch, but have risen steadily throughout March and April. The progress is nice -- but the libraries of iOS, Android and even BlackBerry 10 put Redmond's catalog to shame.

Microsoft allegedly spent $1.5 billion to promote Windows 8. It's an astronomical sum, enough to fund a typical Hollywood marketing blitz three or four times over. All that money was directed at the consumer market, which, as analysts have recently made clear, has the power to determine whether Microsoft remains a leader or regresses into a role player. Imagine if Microsoft had instead tilted its budgets such that an iPod Touch was more expensive than a Windows RT, and a MacBook Air more costly than a Surface Pro. Imagine if OEMs had been incentivized from the start to produce low-cost models, a process that has, according to unverified reports, only recently unfolded. How many millions of additional users might be in the Live Tiles ecosystem? How many more apps might there be?

But there's not much use at this point in criticizing Microsoft's earlier strategy. Hindsight is 20-20, and Redmond has probably reconsidered a number of previous decisions. The point in bringing up the company's earlier missteps is not to pour salt in the wound, but rather to prescribe appropriate remedies.

Previous
1 of 2
Next
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Page 1 / 3   >   >>
amitiekassis
50%
50%
amitiekassis,
User Rank: Apprentice
4/14/2013 | 7:33:12 PM
re: Windows 8 Tablets: Why Microsoft Must Slash Prices
If you think Sandra`s story is astonishing,, three weeks-ago my cousin's step-mum basically brought home $4554 workin 10 hours a week at home and their roomate's half-sister`s neighbour was doing this for 4 months and got a cheque for over $4554 part-time on there labtop. use the information on this page............. ZOO80. Gom
UberGoober
50%
50%
UberGoober,
User Rank: Strategist
4/12/2013 | 9:03:30 PM
re: Windows 8 Tablets: Why Microsoft Must Slash Prices
The question for a lot of us is how much would Micro$oft have to pay us to get us to use a Win8 tablet. Free may not be cheap enough, and cost-equivalent with a similarly spec-ed Android tablet is far more than I would pay. Unless I can get a free 'downgrade' to Win7, of course!
UberGoober
50%
50%
UberGoober,
User Rank: Strategist
4/12/2013 | 8:58:18 PM
re: Windows 8 Tablets: Why Microsoft Must Slash Prices
What a dilemma! Which to care less about, French or a Windows 8 tablet?
Palpatine
50%
50%
Palpatine,
User Rank: Apprentice
4/12/2013 | 9:59:52 AM
re: Windows 8 Tablets: Why Microsoft Must Slash Prices
No, MS needs to slash Windows 8 and its business plan based on killing independent software distribution.
Slashing prices would bring no benefit to W8 adoption rate: it was largely ignored during the much hyped beta stage (1/3 W8Beta than W7Beta!) and it was totally free, so price is not a factor in W8 failure.
lgarey@techweb.com
50%
50%
lgarey@techweb.com,
User Rank: Apprentice
4/11/2013 | 9:07:41 PM
re: Windows 8 Tablets: Why Microsoft Must Slash Prices
Two words: $250 Chromebook!
DDURBIN1
50%
50%
DDURBIN1,
User Rank: Ninja
4/11/2013 | 6:26:24 PM
re: Windows 8 Tablets: Why Microsoft Must Slash Prices
You are right on the mark on all accounts here but Microsoft isn't going to change. The main reason is greed. It is greed that directed all aspects you address. The windows 8 UI is developed around greed, pushing Metro for apps. The hardware features or lack there of is greed. The price at market, again greed. When greed is the predominate director, chances are its going to fail. If the RT was $250 at start Microsoft would have impressed but at $600 they might as well have put Edsel on the front.
melgross
50%
50%
melgross,
User Rank: Ninja
4/11/2013 | 5:33:14 PM
re: Windows 8 Tablets: Why Microsoft Must Slash Prices
This is a more complex issue than you assert. It's been estimated that Surface costs about as much as iPad to produce (for RT). The Pro model costs a good deal more to produce. How much can they reduce those prices by then? $50? Maybe. Any less than that and they are again walking into the dreaded area of losses, which must continue, as that becomes the expected pricing model.

We've seen that boondoggle with the XBox, where Microsoft has now lost over $9 billion over the years, with no end to those losses in sight, particularly with a new model coming out. If you need to subsidize a product to accumulate sales, then the product has failed. That's basic business 101.

The only reason why Microsoft can afford to lose so much money on most of its businesses is because of the dual monopolies of Windows and Office. But the good times of Windows is coming to an end, and Office is following.

So now we get the rumors that Microsoft will have a 7" tablet in order to cut prices. Not the same thing at all. A problem is that the 10.6" screen is already too small for anything other than the "Modern UI" portion of the OS. I used some of the "convertibles" Microsoft was pushing as tablets, and they were difficult to use because of the "small" 13-15" screens. The current models, with their even smaller screens are even harder to use. Can you really imagine using Office on an RT machine with a 7" screen? How about the Pro? Nuts!

And then we have the gorilla in the room, which consists of all the OEM's who must sell their own tablets. If Microsoft cuts pricing, they will be forced to cut to the same level, or more likely, even more so. We already see a number of OEM's who are reluctant to bring forth Win 8 tablets in any form, and the ones who have, are seeing very microscopic sales. These companies are already having the burden of paying Microsoft for the OS, and in the case of RT, which included a truncated version of Office, a rather lot of money, estimated at up to $80 per tablet. How can they cut prices?

I understand Microsoft's dilemma. But that dilemma is of their own making. Management at Microsoft is very poor. Ballmer is not a good CEO. He's failed to reign in the various fiefs, and for that, Microsoft is suffering.

It's very possible that Apple has it right, and Microsoft has it wrong. Perhaps the exact same OS should not be on a tablet and a "classic" computer.. Perhaps there should be a merging of major functions, but on separate OS's. Even so, RT offers nothing of real value other than a version of Office that doesn't belong on it. If sales are any indication, that's the case. How many people want to buy a tablet that really NEEDS to have a keyboard? Few, I would think.

With its advertising for these devices, as with their smartphones, Microsoft shows that it is out of touch with potential buyers. With their smartphones, Microsoft continues to push the myth that users don't want to use their devices, and that Win Phone is the best OS for doing just that, not using it. Microsoft doesn't realize that people love using their smartphones, so they are preaching something that people don't believe in.

The same thing is happening with Surface. Their advertising has kids jumping around, clicking the keyboards onto their tablets, but shows little else. All this does is to tell people that you need a keyboard with Microsoft's tablets, something that people don't want.

If there's a lesson to be learned by business, it's that you don't try to sell people something they don't want. Microsoft hasn't learned that lesson, so every one of their business other than those involving Windows and Office continues to lose major amounts of money, because Microsoft is like AT&T was, they don't know how to sell to anyone who isn't already a captive audience.

If that doesn't change, Microsoft will go the way of AT&T, and I don't mean the current AT&T, which was a merger between AT&T and Cingular, I mean the one that disappeared.
Mike_Acker
50%
50%
Mike_Acker,
User Rank: Apprentice
4/11/2013 | 4:18:20 PM
re: Windows 8 Tablets: Why Microsoft Must Slash Prices
unlikely at best. the entire "microkernel" experiment is a failure. It's Torvalds 1, Tannenbaum 0.
johnitguru
50%
50%
johnitguru,
User Rank: Apprentice
4/11/2013 | 8:55:20 AM
re: Windows 8 Tablets: Why Microsoft Must Slash Prices
But the one thing you failed to say about the Microsoft product is it is a horrible virus trap with a registry in it that will slow down the machine within weeks of operation. This is because it has an ancient DOS FAT file system. So if I were you I would buy a keyboard for your modern iOS Unix iPad and then just use google docs which is free instead of paying Microsoft for Office. Oops there is no MS Office for iPads yet. Go figure!

I disagree with you about Android when you say it lags, freezes up and crashes which leads me to believe that your paycheck has an address on it that says "Redmond Washington".

I own an Asus Transformer 10" tablet with Linux Android and it is the coolest tablet I have ever tried. Plus it has a quad processor in it and it only cost $369 I bought the keyboard for it, not much more money and I use Google docs. But the best part is no viruses as long as I stick with the Google Play authorized apps.

My money is on the Android Asus Transformer!

I wouldn't even consider an overpriced MicroKlunk junk virus trap tablet.

No one needs to put up with that now because we have so many better choices.

The Microsoft monopoly is crumbling fast!
Michael Endler
50%
50%
Michael Endler,
User Rank: Author
4/11/2013 | 6:48:04 AM
re: Windows 8 Tablets: Why Microsoft Must Slash Prices
Thanks for the comment, melgross.

No, I don't think Microsoft or the OEMs would be happy losing $150 per tablet. But why does each tablet have to cost $350 or $400? The Surface RT might have cost that much, but the iPad Mini costs less than $200 in components and manufacturing.

I used the RT as a starting point because consumers found it too expensive for what it offered. But the main thrust of the column is that the forthcoming 7-inch tablets should be priced very aggressively. If Apple can engineer an iPad Mini for less than $200 per unit (per iSuppli), then I don't see why Microsoft and its OEMs couldn't target this price point without losing hundreds of millions of dollars in the process.

Microsoft and its partners probably won't dip as low as $200 but I $250-$299 could be possible without risking financial ruin. As noted, I think it would be a mistake for Microsoft to merely meet the iPad Mini's price point. But if attractive tablets can be priced noticeably below the Mini, I think people would give the WIndows devices a chance. Consumers won't expect the moon at that price, especially if Microsoft et al market them competently.

The end game for Microsoft and its partners isn't defined by the upcoming spate of devices; it's defined by the ecosystem that Microsoft is trying to build for the long term. This is why it makes sense for Microsoft and co to accept lower margins - and who knows, maybe even a few losses - on the upcoming hardware. If some short-term weakness injects a few million additional users into the ecosystem, that's a few million more people using SkyDrive, being tempted toward Office 365 and buying apps. It's also a few million additional reasons for developers to create more and better apps. Losing hundreds of millions of dollars would be bad in any context-- you're right. But I don't think my argument necessitates such losses. Small margins or minor losses are a different issue, particularly if they stimulate business elsewhere.

You mention that "nothing can save a product that people don't want to buy." That's true. But I'm not satisfied that people don't want Windows 8; they just don't want it on some of the current devices, or at the current prices. Expectations can shift if the messaging and price change. As I suggested in the article, a cheap but solid Windows 8 tablet doesn't sound half bad: nice media viewing and web browsing, light word processing tools, etc.

Plus, the platform will get better as more developers come onboard. If more users equates to more attention from developers, then cheap tablets, even with ugly margins, could give WIndows RT some polish relatively quickly-- much quicker, I think, than waiting for Microsoft to iron the UI out on its own.

Plus, Microsoft will still be selling more expensive, high-margin products. I'm not suggesting that ALL WIndows 8 devices need to be ultra-cheap. I said the Surface Pro is too expensive because its specs will be outdated by this summer. I'd have no problem with its Hasewll-equipped successor running $1000. But I wouldn't buy an expensive new tablet if I knew an improved version would be coming within the same year. But should Windows 8 come in a variety of flavors, from sub-$300 RT (and maybe Atom) tablets to $1000+ hybrids? I think so
Page 1 / 3   >   >>
Register for InformationWeek Newsletters
White Papers
Current Issue
InformationWeek Elite 100 - 2014
Our InformationWeek Elite 100 issue -- our 26th ranking of technology innovators -- shines a spotlight on businesses that are succeeding because of their digital strategies. We take a close at look at the top five companies in this year's ranking and the eight winners of our Business Innovation awards, and offer 20 great ideas that you can use in your company. We also provide a ranked list of our Elite 100 innovators.
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Audio Interviews
Archived Audio Interviews
GE is a leader in combining connected devices and advanced analytics in pursuit of practical goals like less downtime, lower operating costs, and higher throughput. At GIO Power & Water, CIO Jim Fowler is part of the team exploring how to apply these techniques to some of the world's essential infrastructure, from power plants to water treatment systems. Join us, and bring your questions, as we talk about what's ahead.