Microsoft's Decision To Kill The Courier Tablet Explained

[back_by_demand]

[citation][nom]DSpider[/nom]Stupid concept really.While you're focusing on one screen (reading, drawing, whatever), the other screen slowly drains the battery away.Think about it. Let's say you're reading a book. You read one page for 45 seconds or a minute, then for the other page about the same. You're basically wasting half the battery time when you're not looking at the other page. If it was colour e-Ink it may have stood a chance, because it uses much less power than an LCD once the macro molecules used for ink are in position.[/citation]
To be fair, if it has 2 screens it also has 2 chassis, so a fantastic design feature would be to have 2 user removable batteries. Even better would be to be able to replace one whilst still switched on - that would be a killer feature.

 

[cookoy]

too bad MS killed it without improving it first trying to improve it further. you just can't make one universal OS to run on all devices from mainframes to smartphones. the less powerful, less capable devices have to run on scaled-down OS.

 

[epobirs]

It was the right decision. Courier was nifty but far too narrowly focused. It makes far more sense to create a version of Windows suitable for general purpose tablets and then offer a Courier environment as an application running on top of that Windows. That way, you can reach the specialist audiences as applications always have.

Look at it this way. Imagine working at Apple in 1987. Desktop Publishing had become a big growth sector for the Mac platform. Would that make it a good idea to make a machine that used a modified Mac OS to be a dedicated Desktop Publishing box? Of course not. The proposal would have been shot down quickly and deservedly.

Once Windows 8 ships, there is no reason a company could not develop a Courier-like machine. The difference is that it wouldn't be limited to just those things Courier was intended to do. If the customer wants to install a full function e-mail client, let them. It isn't for the product designer to dictate to the customer what the product is good for in pursuit of new functionality. Computers are very good at shifting gears if designed correctly.

 

[epobirs]

[citation][nom]DSpider[/nom]Stupid concept really.While you're focusing on one screen (reading, drawing, whatever), the other screen slowly drains the battery away.Think about it. Let's say you're reading a book. You read one page for 45 seconds or a minute, then for the other page about the same. You're basically wasting half the battery time when you're not looking at the other page. If it was colour e-Ink it may have stood a chance, because it uses much less power than an LCD once the macro molecules used for ink are in position.[/citation]

I don't believe you've thought that through. There are several reasons for having the two screens. First, it allows for a much greater amount of screen area in a smaller form factor, similar to the Nintendo DS. Second, you don't have to drive both screens constantly. With smart software design, a screen that has nothing going on and doesn't need to be lit at a given moment can go dark to save battery life. This is much more versatile than a single larger screen.

A single larger screen can be preferable for content consumption but that is not the target of the design. There was already one product, now dead, called Entourage that took a similar dual-screen approach, with e-ink on one side and LCD on the other. It was interesting but the company didn't have the resources to sufficiently refine the design into what it needed to be to sell. Plus they also didn't have the backing to to achieve enough public awareness.

 

[jeffredo]

Another example of Microsoft's long slide into irrelevance.

 

[Guest]

DSpider 11/06/2011 10:02 AM
Hide
-0+

Stupid concept really.

While you're focusing on one screen (reading, drawing, whatever), the other screen slowly drains the battery away.

Oh boy...then the same can be said about the current display,just make a one pixel screen cuz when you olok at one pixel the remaining are just wasting energy....

 

[dalauder]

[citation][nom]Flamango[/nom]MR. ROSS. You're an idiot. As an artist and a designer I'd KILL for this level of functionality and fluidity. DAMN YOU and your stupid concepts of what needs to be "right" for an electronic device. The world doesn't need idiots like you talking down content creation devices just because they can't check email! This is meant to replace a real life notebook, you know the one with pages? Can a piece of paper check email? No. Do I really want the medium for my creative outlet to be reminding of my ties and obligations to the real world? No. Bill Gates is an idiot. Nobody in the electronics world has the heart to gives us artists the one thing that we'd really love and appreciate without burdening it with "connectivity" and "special offers". It's so stupid. I'm sorry you aren't in agreement with me, maybe if you were our electronic devices would actually be cool and functional and specialized. Stupid, stupid, stupid.[/citation]I think you're missing the point. If someone pays $500, they want to be told what the device can do, not what it can't. Would anyone buy Android if it's motto was, "Droid doesn't"? I think Bill Gates would've been onboard if he was pitched a product designed around potential rather than limitation (aka narrowly honed focus).

The creative device you want could be awesome, but should only sell for $200 or less. The two screens may be REALLY nice in terms of shrinking a tablet into something that can fit in your pocket or comfortably in your hand on a LONG walk. But I don't think they were planning on that price point, which means the product would have failed. That is, unless you're willing to replace your pad and paper with a $500 version. Personally, I'll stick to scanning the stuff that's good enough to keep until capable $200 tablets are mainstream (if that ever happens).

 

[willwayne]

Really, we just have to wait for flexible touchscreens to make it to consumer devices -- then you can have a folding tablet without a bezel between the two pieces, while maintaining some rigidity when fully opened.

 

[Asgaroth]

[citation][nom]killerclick[/nom]I'm glad this didn't come out. It would've been another Zune to Apple's iPod. Why use advanced technology to replicate the functionality of ancient technology?[/citation]

Zune is way batter mp3 player + nice screen (talking about 120GB version) too bad it was discontinued. I like Zune software as well, and cant' stand iTunes.

I wrote this from Mac Book Pro

 

[eddieroolz]

I had forgotten about this until now.

Really, it was a shame that rivalry keeps ruining good ideas and products. This doesn't just apply to companies, it applies to military, government, interpersonal relations, etc.

 

[Northwestern]

[citation][nom]DSpider[/nom]Stupid concept really.While you're focusing on one screen (reading, drawing, whatever), the other screen slowly drains the battery away.Think about it. Let's say you're reading a book. You read one page for 45 seconds or a minute, then for the other page about the same. You're basically wasting half the battery time when you're not looking at the other page. If it was colour e-Ink it may have stood a chance, because it uses much less power than an LCD once the macro molecules used for ink are in position.[/citation]

Simply add a feature that can have you switch a screen off when one is not in use. This isn't rocket science.