Comments on: Microsoft: we’ve got a UMPC naming problem http://gigaom.com/2006/04/18/microsoft_weve_/ Sun, 19 May 2013 03:33:04 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: cobalt http://gigaom.com/2006/04/18/microsoft_weve_/#comment-43351 Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:22:13 +0000 http://jkontherun.wordpress.com/2006/04/18/microsoft_weve_#comment-43351 I think the attempt by Intel and MS to introduce a standardized form factor called the UMPC was timely, and that the near simultaneous introduction of the W10 and the Averratec “UMPCs” are illustrations of this timeliness. The UMPC is a technological possibility now and in the next couple years. In the end, consumers benefit from commoditization of components in any computer form factor. IMO. hat you call these things isn’t as important as the issue of whether the popularity of a form factor drives lower prices and spurs hardware and software development.

]]> By: Josh Einstein http://gigaom.com/2006/04/18/microsoft_weve_/#comment-43352 Tue, 18 Apr 2006 12:28:17 +0000 http://jkontherun.wordpress.com/2006/04/18/microsoft_weve_#comment-43352 I predicted this would happen.
http://josheinstein.com/journal/archive/2006/03/09/1322.aspx

]]> By: Ellis Z http://gigaom.com/2006/04/18/microsoft_weve_/#comment-43353 Tue, 18 Apr 2006 10:59:11 +0000 http://jkontherun.wordpress.com/2006/04/18/microsoft_weve_#comment-43353 Agreed. If they use UMPC for everything small then they make the term useless.

That said: UMPC is a stupid name. But then again this is from the company that brought us that OTHER stupid name: WINCE. (pronounced by the common public as the word “wince”)

]]> By: e http://gigaom.com/2006/04/18/microsoft_weve_/#comment-43354 Tue, 18 Apr 2006 08:47:00 +0000 http://jkontherun.wordpress.com/2006/04/18/microsoft_weve_#comment-43354

]]>