Should Microsoft's Kin Be Considered the "Son of Sidekick?"

First published on Technorati April 13, 2010

The launch of Microsoft’s Kin carried with it many assumptions and expectations. First there was the Microsoft purchase of Danger, the operating system that powers the Sidekick. Since the Sidekick target customer was considered “young and social”, many reviewers and bloggers I spoke with came to today’s launch event expecting to see a “Son of Sidekick.”

The Windows Phone 7 launch, and the deep dive for developers at Mix10, lead some people to believe that Microsoft might not launch its own branded phone first, and many speculated that today's announcements might be about a Microsoft tablet.

Xbox, clearly a component of the Windows Phone 7 plan, has yet to be leveraged into a mobile strategy. And finally, the Microsoft launch of Kin comes a full two years after the last major Windows Mobile OS release, during which time Apple and Google have captured consumers’ hearts and minds with apps and more apps, establishing app stores as the primary battleground for smartphone operating systems.

So, like many folks who attended today’s event in San Francisco, I approached the launch with my pre-conceived ideas of what Kin would mean to the market and to Microsoft.

I had seen the leaked hardware, which is made by the same manufacturer, Sharp, that built the Sidekick. And I had seen early concepts of Pink long before Windows Mobile changed its name to Windows Phone 7. But to burden Kin with all of those expectations is to do the device an injustice. Kin deserves a fair shake at finding its own audience, and the time to develop its rightful place in Verizon’s device portfolio.

Sure, many people buy based on the specs of the phone, like megapixels and memory, that the industry calls “feeds and speeds.” And Kin doesn’t have the most and biggest of very much. But having the most of everything may not be what the audience for this phone really needs, because feeds and speeds add to the bottom line cost of the handset, and for Kin’s 18-24 year old target, budget may be a real constraint.


Read the rest of my coverage of the Kin launch on Technorati

Comments

[Jenny]

Microsoft's tablet scam failed, because it deserved to. The company's incapable of producing inventions and innovation, because it's fired all of it's best and brightest, in favor of the cheap, the not brightest, not best. The tablet was stolen from a real inventor, by one of the fllim flam men Gates champions, a visa worker capable of only pretense. He didn't create the device, he stole an unfinished product and thought he could get rich on the back of his victim. Gates, an incredibly wealthy man, whose greed has twisted him, has destroyed a once great company.

Even his former VP questioned why Microsoft hasn't had invention or innovation in a decade. He wouldn't bring up the salient point, the fact that it all died when the company fired the truly best and brightest, and replaced them with cheap foreign labor.

If you care about technology and innovation, then you need to stop providing any cover for Microsoft, and firms like it.

[Gearhead Gal]

First, thank you for commenting, and articulating your position so effectively. I am sure there is history or perspective you bring which I don't know about specifically.

That said, while I agree there are serious innovation and organizational flaws apparent with Microsoft, and even maybe a few truly evil people in a company of Microsoft's size, I do know a number of talented individuals that remain employed at the company who do work against the gravity from opposing forces across the enterprise. So I support their efforts and I applaud their bravery, if what you say is true. The company may be incapable of supporting them, but I believe they are talented people and by covering what Microsoft does or doesn't contribute to the technology world and consumer experience maybe it helps everyone learn.