OEMs need a little discipline, but they’ll live

Tuesday brought news of yet another Microsoft OEM thumbing its nose atWindows RT.

Toshiba said in a statement that it had canceled all plans to produce tablets based on the platform citing “component shortages.” This is the third OEM to do so, after Acer CEO JT Wang publicly trashed Redmond over its decision to produce the Surface. HP said no thanks in June.

“Toshiba will focus on bringing Windows 8 products to market,” a spokesperson tells ExtremeTech. Ouch.

It’s no secret that Microsoft’s tablet has ruffled feathers. It disrupted a business strategy that the company followed for nearly three decades: build the platform, but leave the job of producing the hardware to your partners. This worked rather well for a very long time, but not anymore. These partners have become progressively la ier, so it’s time to lay down the law.

Apple is a great example of the positives of this top-down, vertically integrated approach. The company produces both the software and the hardware it runs on. The result? Products that work the way they’re supposed to with little fuss, and sets the standard by which all others are judged. While Microsoft — and Google too — has a much different business model, they would just as much like to see products that “just work.”

Nobody can do it better

Microsoft and Google have both now seen the light. Allowing your partners to run free and design hardware as they see fit is great for variety in the end product, but it does come with disadvantages. OEM partners drift from your initial vision, and this leads to a problems that you end up having to fix.

Just look at the amount of crappy Windows and Android-based hardware out there. While this is wonderful for the bargain hunter, it’s not for Google and Microsoft. A good portion of the problems experienced by us users have a lot to do with hardware issues, and not necessarily the software itself.

In these situations both the hardware manufacturer and the software developer are blamed for the problems experienced. OEMs have become la y, and hardware quality has suffered. This in turn has held back Microsoft and Google, which have to cater to the lowest common denominator.

In the case of Microsoft, as Ed Bott wrote back in June, the Surface is not a move to kill the OEM. “OEMs can whine all they want about Microsoft’s decision to engineer their own hardware,” he argues. “But maybe when they’re through whining they can accept the challenge that Surface represents: You’re in the hardware business. Do better than this.”

That’s the point.

A good swift kick in the pants

Surface (and the Google Nexus line) are examples of this gentle prod to do better. Microsoft and Google’s in-house devices are built to work in concert with the software, not against it or around it: everything melds together in perfect harmony. These devices are also innovative, something that many OEM devices lack. That’s the biggest thing.

In a search for maximi ing profit margins, OEMs have cut corners. While this has a lot to do with consumer’s desire for cheap stuff, it doesn’t help Microsoft’s case. Windows 8 is a big step forward for Microsoft in advancing the Windows platform. If it’s running on sub-par hardware, the consumer is not going to be happy.

Microsoft and Google’s flirtation with home-grown hardware is a kick in the pants to their partners. While executives like Mr. Wang like to complain about these companies encroaching on their turf, it would have never had to happen if hardware kept pace in the first place. Microsoft and Google aren’t hurting the OEM — they’re helping them. Perhaps driving this point home, Microsoft has said that the Surface will only be available in Microsoft Stores in the US and “select online Microsoft Stores” — it’s not like the Surface will be competing with OEM PCs on sale at Ama on or big box retailers.

OEMs need a little discipline, but they’ll live