“I want that!”

In a NYT article today, Steve Ballmer says that at least one customer has expressed interest in the secret Microsoft Courier tablet project.

One? Only one? I’m guessing hundreds, if not thousands. But who’s quibbling over a couple magnitudes when talk of tablets is so hot right now?

That’s kind of the point of the article. That is, that tablets are nearing their prime. Actually, I’d say that it’s not just tablets per se, it’s slates. That’s what’s so hot now.

In part, it’s because of the success of the iPhone. I think Apple showed how it’s done. It hasn’t completely convinced everyone of the value of tablets, but when would that ever be anyway? Can’t win ’em all as they say.

Forrester Research analyst Paul Jackson has a good point in the article: “Software engineers got ahead of the hardware capabilities.” That’s true. However, I’d add one bit of clarity to he statement: That it’s about cost for a particular customer segment. That’s been the sticking point. People have been offering up slates since the early 90s. First there was the Go Corp/Slate, then the Apple Newton, then a first iterations of the Tablet PC, the UMPC, MIDs, and now the iPhone and impending Apple tablet. There’s lots of history here.

And each of them succeeded not specifically because of cost and hardware per se. It was as much that with high costs or limited functionality only a small number of people could afford it. And in terms of functionality, no one has been able to nail down the right recipe for a growth market. Exactly what that market is and what they will pay has been the stickler.

In fact, I’d argue that Microsoft has been the closest here for a long time. They could see the value of tablets if even a good chunck of the company couldn’t. Yes, the IT biased Windows and Office segments of the company are just too powerful in Microsoft. These groups are something that’s traditionaly benefited the company, but as we’ve seen only a small portion of the IT market actually wants a tablet. Now on the consumer side, that’s a whole other story–especially if we’re talking in terms of a more focused device, something that’s more mobile focused than let’s say a desktop or a PC.

With the release of the iPhone it became really obvious what would sell to consumers. Now the race has been to find that magic potion of just enough features, just enough hardware, just enough connectivity, just enough sensing, just enough battery life, just enough form factor, just enough software. It’s a delicate balance. Too many features is going to drive up the pocket cost of too many customers.

Don’t lose sight of what’s going on here. I’m talking in terms of actual customer customers–not big IT organizations. The onezies and twosies. Mega companies can justify the cost for devices based on what they can save. Consumers have a different equation. It’s elusive, but still exists.

So far Microsoft and Intel have been pinned down by the success of their existing customers, Apple hasn’t or more precisely Apple has been chomping at the bit trying to grow into the markets that the others have been underserving. That includes the consumer market.

So here we are, seven or so years from the launch of the Tablet PC and we’re finally nearing the dream. Would it have happened at all without the Tablet PC efforts? Who knows. But after seeing all that’s gone on I do see why it’s Microsoft that wound up with the expensive and large multi-touch Microsoft Surface Computer and Apple the expensive multi-touch iPhone. Do you?