If you’re involved with ultra mobile PC marketing, you will have had these thoughts a million times. Should the ultra mobile PC be pushed into the mass-market consumer space with price reductions or should it be left for a while to develop through VAR channels?
Hugo Ortega and Dr Neil Roodyn have had this discussion on a podcast which stimulated another refinement of my own ideas about how UMPCs should be marketed. I’m a believer that UMPCs should be left with the value added resellers for the time being. Why? Because no-one understands what “UMPC” means yet and as Microsoft don’t seem to be helping anyone understand the term, the VARs are the only people left in a position to do this. But only while margins remain high enough for them to be able to spend the time doing it.
As someone who will be relying on ultra mobile PC ad-sales to supplement their income in 2007, I’d love the market to go ‘consumer’ tomorrow. It would do wonders for my income but if the market dies a few months later, no-one wins.
Here’s a post I made recently about incubating the UMPC.
In my opinion, the $500 ultra mobile PC could really damage the traditional product lifecycle.
I’d like to add something to the discussion too and that is, should we continue using the term UMPC? Here’s my opinion. Microsoft obviously like the term at the moment as it [attempts to] define a narrow category of ultra mobile devices. But in my eyes, it only causes confusion. In mid 2007, what will be the differentiating factor between a non-MS ultra mobile PC and MS ultra mobile PC both running Vista. Nothing. It will just become an even more confusing term. We should embrace the term “UMPC” for all Ultra Mobile PCs and Microsoft should keep out of the marketing altogether. The promise of $500 UMPCs is more dangerous than its worth. They did a nice job of pushing the market forward but its time for them to step back and let the manufacturers and VARs do their hardware stuff. Maybe they already did. We haven’t heard anything substantial from them for a while.
I’m starting to use the term “Mobile MiniPC” now and people are understanding what I mean a lot quicker than before. I’ve though about using the term “Companion PC” but it implies having a second PC and I think that the ultra mobile PC form factor with dock can make a decent notebook/low-end PC replacement. (It has been my main PC for 3 weeks now. )
Have a listen to the podcast and let me know what you think. Its a great discussion point and hopefully by airing it, we help people come to their own conclusions.
Steve / Chippy.
the marketing (or lack there of) regarding the UMPC seems to be a bit of a topic for discussion.
I’ve noticed around campus if i mention a “UMPC” most people are clueless. If i mention an “Origami” people begin to ask “isn’t that the Microsoft mini computer thing”
about a minute later the usual response is something about cost being too high.
From having two of those conversations with different people in the past week, i’ve come to realize two things:
a) The UMPC should have been renamed “The Origami.” That’s a name that is still used within the community, and apparently those outside of the direct UMPC community still recognize the name if not immediately the device.
b) At the VAR marketed prices these devices are too expensive for most students. I’ve had more than one person ask me about the device rather eagerly, then after the price came up the *UMPC was immediately too expensive.
*Now if the device were marketed as a tool for people in the workplace, or to students, and offered the capability of running OneNote, Office Suite…..(the explaination goes on) people may be able to comprehend how this is truly a companion secondary device.