alfabytes

Microsoft and RIM are relying on a single basket

A few weeks ago I gave this interview with Media Indonesia, a local newspaper who wanted to put up a profile of me for some reason and in it was a question about Microsoft. This is a small part of what I had to say about the company:

The Surface table and the Microsoft Courier tablet were breakthrough devices between 2009-2010 which also could not get off the ground thanks to the company prioritizing the team on Windows and Office.

By coincidence, C|net produced this article yesterday about how Bill Gates practically killed the Courier tablet even when he was no longer running Microsoft. This part here explained what happened to the Courier:

Courier users wouldn’t want or need a feature-rich e-mail application such as Microsoft’s Outlook that lets them switch to conversation views in their inbox or support offline e-mail reading and writing. The key to Courier, Allard’s team argued, was its focus on content creation. Courier was for the creative set, a gadget on which architects might begin to sketch building plans, or writers might begin to draft documents.

“This is where Bill had an allergic reaction,” said one Courier worker who talked with an attendee of the meeting. As is his style in product reviews, Gates pressed Allard, challenging the logic of the approach.

It’s not hard to understand Gates’ response. Microsoft makes billions of dollars every year on its Exchange e-mail server software and its Outlook e-mail application. While heated debates are common in Microsoft’s development process, Gates’ concerns didn’t bode well for Courier. He conveyed his opinions to Ballmer, who was gathering data from others at the company as well.

Within a few weeks, Courier was cancelled because the product didn’t clearly align with the company’s Windows and Office franchises, according to sources.

Instead of seeking and taking a risk on a possible new revenue stream, Gates and Microsoft held on to its existing and proven source or revenue. This is similar to the approach that RIM took by requiring the PlayBook to be not much more than a BlackBerry accessory.

Both companies are holding on to a core component which heavily relies on the success of a single product, essentially putting everything into a single basket. This is why they keep failing to innovate. RIMs basket is breaking as we speak although it’s probably going to be a long while before Microsoft’s Windows/Office basket breaks.