Why A Microsoft Tablet Is Doomed

It makes perfect sense that Microsoft wants in as the world moves to more mobile, power-frugal, multivariate devices. Microsoft, however, is very ill-equipped to participate in a meaningful way, principally because it thinks about itself before it thinks about customers.

There is an obvious problem with that approach (you usually do better by thinking about customers first), and a less obvious one (Microsoft is of too many minds about what it wants for itself). In other words, you could get away with putting customers second if you were really, really good at thinking about yourself first and on executing on that vision. Microsoft's recent track record indicates that it's lost the touch (pardon the pun) for doing that effectively.

Here's what Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer has to say about the current craze for netbooks:

We want people to be able to get the advantages of lightweight performance and be able to spend more money with us.

Now that we have customer focus out of the way, how about internal synergies, especially where mobility is concerned? Silicon Alley Insider's brilliant Dan Frommer informs us that Microsoft's Zune and Windows Mobile divisions were essentially at war over who got to build an app store, and that Windows Mobile won:

Microsoft Zune executive Brian Seitz explained this week that Microsoft's Windows Mobile division "is tackling the challenge of a mobile apps marketplace right now," and Microsoft is "trying to get out of the business of building similar things in the company that don't work together."

Translation: We didn't build an app store for the Zune because Windows Mobile is working on an app store, and we can't compete with Windows Mobile. This is frustrating, because our new gadget (Zune HD) is better than theirs (Windows Mobile).

Still, it makes sense for Microsoft to want in on this new mobile craze, even if it doesn't have an operating system to run it on. As a hardware vendor, Microsoft's results are mixed: the Xbox 360 is a hit, Zune is a flop, and Surface is actually as inconsequential as Microsoft pretends netbooks to be. That's a .333 average, which is great if you're playing baseball, but not so good if you're playing basketball (or any other sport).

That said, Microsoft absolutely, desperately needs to find a way to jump on the mobile bandwagon, and Windows becoming the operating system of choice for netbook vendors, as it became synonymous with PCs, is not going to happen. Despite its contention that Windows 7 will run well on netbooks, there are plenty of contenders with cheaper operating systems that are actually good at running netbooks. Not only is Windows now competing with Android, Chrome, and other HTML5+-based operating systems, but the likes of Intel, Nokia and Qualcomm, which are reinventing themselves as netbook vendors, don't even have long-term Microsoft Windows habit to kick. And we haven't even discussed the much-rumored Apple tablet.

So building its own tablet is really a strategic necessity. But if Microsoft really does build its own tablet, it will be better off ditching Windows and running a leaner Linux-based OS. The device might actually run faster and cooler, and would assure that the Office franchise makes the leap to the mobile century. One thing you can be sure of is that no one would be able to configure the OS and Office applications together as well as Microsoft.

However, this would require Microsoft to reject its flagship and, even if it's just for this one form factor, such as step would be unthinkable for the folks at Redmond. And that, in a nutshell, is why Microsoft will continue down the road of irrelevance. As Frommer said, Microsoft is

Struggling to solve old problems that competitors have already figured out; always following, never leading; and, above all, working so hard to protect the Windows monopoly that it just can't get out of its own way. The result is now a big, convoluted mess.