Microsoft Drops 'Smart Displays'

Good new or bad news?

I think the whole idea of smart displays was kind of silly. Maybe I am wrong here but wireless in it's current state (802.11b/g) would not have the throughput needed for certain things. For streaming TV it would require 8mbits. That's the only reason I see to use smart displays. Without a keyboard it is for the most part useless for normal computing tasks.

A good smart display would have to be able to handle all types of media for viewing.

Didn't Steve say that people didn't want to watch media (TV, Movies…) on their computer. So why would Apple make a tablet/smart display?

Originally posted by dho
Good new or bad news?

More interesting news.

I guess Microsoft feels it is not a big market. Also gives pause to those who think Apple should create a similar device.

arn

Good news I say. Just an example of Microsoft dropping a bad idea. Really, who needs a smart clipboard when there's a computer within 100 feet anyway. :rolleyes:

Now the M$ worshippers can shut up about how Apple is missing out on some 'innovative' M$ idea and folks here can quit talking about the Apple Tablet PC "about to be released".

This is just the first nail in the coffin of the will be techno flop of Tablet Computing.

Considering how the Tablet PC has gone over like a lead balloon, this doesn't come as a surprise.

Microsoft, with Smart Displays and Media PC's seems to think that people will spend all of their time in front of a PC in one form or another in future. TV's will be PC's with large displays, in essence.

I sit less than a yard away from my PC at all times. And always sit more than a yard away from my TV. That usage difference alone should clue Microsoft that they're two different experiences. TV did not replace radio, it created a whole new market. And the Internet will not supplant TV, it is a media distinct on it's own.

Let's make a list of all the "interactive TV" success stories out there, shall we?
-
-
-
-
-
That was fun, wasn't it? :D

Okay, if we stretch the definition, we can add TiVo into the mix, and maybe the latest incarnations of the xBox and Playstation that allow for online gaming. But MicroSoft's vision of the future, where people are tied to there computers throughtout the day, is not one I want to participate.

Originally posted by Hawthorne
MicroSoft's vision of the future, where people are tied to there computers throughtout the day, is not one I want to participate.

But in reality that is what is going to happen. You don't think that each house is going to have an xserve in the basement running most everything in your house? Your TiVo would be contained in that. You TV would come into your house via FTTH. You could bring up your calendar on any screen in the house. Your VoIP server would be in this xserve. Everything in your house would have a ethernet port. Even your lights. The server could have timed lighting controls. Is this a bad thing? I don't think so. Technology isn't bad when you don't notice it. You will be working off your own personal computer but it might not be in the form we use it today. Microsoft fails to realize that using the computer doesn’t have to be in front of a blue screen.

Originally posted by whfsdude
But in reality that is what is going to happen. You don't think that each house is going to have an xserve in the basement running most everything in your house? Your TiVo would be contained in that. You TV would come into your house via FTTH. You could bring up your calendar on any screen in the house. Your VoIP server would be in this xserve. Everything in your house would have a ethernet port. Even your lights. The server could have timed lighting controls. Is this a bad thing? I don't think so. Technology isn't bad when you don't notice it. You will be working off your own personal computer but it might not be in the form we use it today. Microsoft fails to realize that using the computer doesn’t have to be in front of a blue screen.

I agree, we have the technologies and hardware to make this a reality, but it hasn't taken off yet... two reason for this: first, there's no software company willing to take the lead, form a consortium, and establish standards. standards will need to be enacted before different companies are willing to work together to create this type of network. The second problem is interface. It's the reason that tablets fail, i think... there's no good way to control and input information on your TV... i mean who cares if your coffee maker can check your email, it's a novelty. Once speech recognition really takes a solid hold, and they figure out a cursor for the interface, it'll start to become a recognized industry. Personally i think gyroscopic remotes will fill the needs of controlling the system, but even speech recognition falls somewhat short in surfing the web, emailing from your living room or bathroom display... so you need a keyboard. which is the main obstacle.

paul

Originally posted by whfsdude
But in reality that is what is going to happen. You don't think that each house is going to have an xserve in the basement running most everything in your house? Your TiVo would be contained in that. You TV would come into your house via FTTH. You could bring up your calendar on any screen in the house. Your VoIP server would be in this xserve. Everything in your house would have a ethernet port. Even your lights. The server could have timed lighting controls. Is this a bad thing? I don't think so. Technology isn't bad when you don't notice it. You will be working off your own personal computer but it might not be in the form we use it today. Microsoft fails to realize that using the computer doesn’t have to be in front of a blue screen.

i agree, and the idea of having basically a wireless screen to scess this central server isint a bad one, but i think it isint really useful until you have a hous-wide system like this. lets say this wireless screen would cost $1000 (reasonable for a new technology) and you'd still have to buy a desktop to tye into with this screen. that brings your total up to at least $2000 more likely closer to $3000. now thats alot to pay for the ability to walk 100 feet away from your computer. personally i would just buy a laptop, you have the same portability around the house and you can take the whole computere with you! all for around $1500 - $2500!!

now id be interested in a smart display if i had a house where i could control everything fron the display, kinda like a remote control for your house, but until then, its kinda useless

Originally posted by whfsdude
Is this a bad thing? I don't think so.

Well it could be, the server would have to be much more stable on the software and hardware side before I would trust having my entire house run though a server.

The rare system freeze/crash could be livable, but in the case of a hardware failure it would really suck to have your TV, Computer, Refrigerator, Security System, Heating, A/C, Shower, Lights etc. all go down with it. :)

They didn't say they are discontinuing the Tablet PC, just the smart displays.

When I first saw these things, I wasn't impressed. I wondered why someone would buy that when they could get a tablet.

Now, however, I think it could be a really good idea. Imagine you own several computers around the house. You could, in theory if this was done right, have a bunch of cheap computers around the house controling different things. With the flip of a on-screen menu you could switch between different computers. Imagine controlling your stero from anywhere in the house (assuming your stero is based on a computer), and all the other things you could do with it.

The major problems, which make the product infeasable for most consumers, are:
1) the wireless bandwidth isn't there
2) the display technology is too expensive ($350 -500 would be more like it).
3) most consumers would only think of it to surf the web (which isn't nessessarily a bad thing, but a laptop would probably be a better thing.

If you can develop the technology, make it cheaper and, in general, get it ready for prime time, it could be a really cool thing.

As for Tablet PCs, the ONLY reason they aren't doing better is because they are twice the price of a notebook of equal specifications. If Dell could offer a Tablet PC for $899, with similar specs to a laptop for that price, they would fly off the shelf.