GigaOM Pro

With rumors about a potential Apple iPad lighting up the Internet the past few weeks, I was reminded of a past attempt at web tablet glory.  Back in 2000, the buzz around web tablets was such that even chipmaker Intel had the chutzpah to make one. Although it demoed the product in January 2001 at CES, the company realized — perhaps thankfully — that it was a tad early on this market and never actually released it.

If Intel released a web tablet today, no one could claim it would be early. Instead, it seems we are the precipice of a new and glorious web tablet era — or so that’s what you’d think from reading the fawning discussion about the yet-to-be-released Apple product.

So what’s going on here?  Tablet PCs have been around since the early ’90s, and web tablet concept prototypes have been making the jump from cocktail napkins to white boards over the past 10 years with no real breakout hits as of yet. Is this really the dawn of a new age, or are we setting ourselves up for more disappointment as the web tablet solidifies itself as a perpetual good-in-theory-bad-in-practice product category?

Anyone who’s examined the history of the concept has a right to be skeptical, but I think the web tablet is for real this time. And before you accusing me of saying it’s because Apple may enter the market – because hey, Apple always succeeds, right? – that’s not the reason why. Instead, the real reason the web tablet will succeed is there is an actual hole in the market for a lightweight, mid-sized surfing and entertainment touchscreen device. And, while most people think Apple’s success lies in its industrial design and care for detail, I think its actually because the company has an uncanny ability to see holes and then move to fill them.

Ironically, Microsoft identified this hole before Apple with its UMPC/Origami efforts (though Apple would claim its Newton was the first attempt at this market). But you know what they say: everything looks like a nail when you’re carrying a hammer (or, in this case, a monopolistic market position in desktop operating systems). The market doesn’t need a fat-client software stack stuffed in a mid-sized form factor device. Apple (and others) realize this, but Microsoft doesn’t.

The market is screaming for a lean, mid-sized, highly connected web device. For video, reading and gaming applications, a bigger screen would excel over a smaller device (such as a smartphone), and a web tablet would in many ways be much more enjoyable for these applications than laptops or even netbooks (which is what Microsoft’s UMPC should have been in the first place).

So why now and not 2001? Pretty simple: Advances in CPUs, the rise of mobile broadband (remember that old Intel device? It had a Home RF connection), and the accompanying move of applications and entertainment into the cloud. All these factors mean a great experience in such a device is possible today. Back then — it just wasn’t.