Microsoft has postponed the launch of its highly touted new Smart Display--the tablet-sized gadget formerly known as Mira. That's a good move--because there are some pretty stupid things in the Smart Display's design.
Anytime a PR person starts calling me less as a product launch approaches, it's typically not a good sign. So I wasn't surprised to see Microsoft's announcement last week that it was postponing the launch of Windows-powered Smart Displays. The bigger question is: What took them so long?
From the start, the device formerly known as Mira seemed to be on a collision course with Microsoft's Tablet PC, which will debut on Nov. 7. While a Tablet PC is actually a fully functional PC, a Smart Display is just an add-on flat-panel monitor that wirelessly connects to an existing PC.
Trouble is, Smart Displays look just like the slate-styled tablets. Had both products hit the market within weeks of one another, that similarity would almost certainly have caused mass confusion among consumers. In fact, Microsoft partner ViewSonic is expected to launch both a Smart Display and a Tablet PC--a marketing train wreck just waiting to happen.
Microsoft is publicly insisting that not only does the Smart Display delay have nothing to do with the Tablet PC launch, but the extra time is not being used to address any of the other problems with Smart Displays--and there are several.
For example, Smart Displays would seem to complement PCs running Windows XP Media Center quite nicely. If you have a Media Center system, it'd be nice to have an additional wireless display on which you could view digital images and video and listen to your music. The only problem with that scenario: The first version of Smart Displays won't support Media Center's nifty user interface. (It will allow access to all of the files--including audio and video-- contained on the Media Center's hard disk.) Microsoft says this incompatibility will be addressed in future builds of the Smart Display software.
An even bigger head-scratcher: Smart Displays require that the base PC run Windows XP Professional Edition. If ever there was a product geared toward home users, this is it. Since many home users use the less expensive Windows XP Home Edition (for most folks, spending the extra dough for Pro makes absolutely no sense), I really don't understand Microsoft's thinking here. And the Redmondians say this issue won't be addressed in the first version of the Smart Display software. Instead, the company is looking at ways to simplify the upgrade process from Windows XP Home Edition to Windows XP Professional Edition.
I'm hoping the company--which has a pretty good record of recognizing its own blunders (witness its recent quick turnaround regarding Media Center's DVD-writing capabilities)--will soon realize the error of its ways here, too. I certainly understand the desire to get a product to market. But if Microsoft releases a seriously flawed first generation of the Smart Displays, it risks killing an interesting new product category before it's even born.
It's not too late for Microsoft to step back and fix at least some of those flaws. At least then Smart Displays will have a fighting chance.
6%
2%
