Windows 8

Laptop sales have been tanking as tablets surge. The new Windows 8 is off to a slow start with users. And the hybrid machines that claim to work as both tablets and laptops are still niche products. So what’s a laptop maker to do?

Well, most Windows laptop companies are promising to spend this year driving prices down, while continuing to experiment with better hybrid designs. But not Toshiba. The venerable Japanese firm has decided to go upscale, introducing an all-new brand of conventional 13-inch laptops that are positioned as premium products, with prices starting at $1,600.

That over-$1,000 market has long been the territory of Apple. But Toshiba figures it can offer buyers with deep pockets the Windows equivalent of Apple’s popular and much-praised MacBook Air, with premium materials, strong specs and a good warranty. It’s called the Kirabook, part of a new Toshiba brand called Kira.

I’ve been testing a Kirabook for the past five days and I found it to be a good computer whose strongest feature is a brilliant, high-resolution screen. It’s a speedy and reliable machine that’s thin and light without feeling cheap.

The Kirabook’s strongest feature is its high-resolution screen. It’s speedy, thin and light without feeling cheap.

But I consider it overpriced for what it offers. It actually costs more than a MacBook Air, but with much worse battery life, an older processor and a design that looks like a lot of other grayish, metallic laptops.

There are three models. The top one, which costs $2,000, is distinguished mainly by its use of a very fast processor that average consumers won’t need. The other two models are identical, except the entry-level offering, at $1,600, has a standard, non-touch screen. The middle model, at $1,800, which I tested, has a touch screen.

The MacBook Air also has a non-touch screen, but that’s because its operating system, Mac OS X Mountain Lion, isn’t designed for touch screens. By contrast, Windows 8 is a touch-centric operating system, and I don’t recommend consumers buying Windows 8 computers to opt for non-touch screens. So the least expensive Kirabook that works optimally with its operating system costs $1,800.

How do those prices compare with Apple’s, which have traditionally been higher than those of most Windows PCs?

Well, the base $1,600 Kirabook with the non-touch screen includes a generous 8 gigabytes of memory and a 256 GB solid-state drive. The base 13-inch MacBook Air, whose price was cut $100 just Monday, costs $1,099. But when configured with the same amount of memory and solid-state storage, it costs $1,399, still about $200 less than the non-touch Kirabook and $400 less than the touch-screen model.

The two machines each weigh a hair under 3 pounds and are roughly 0.7-inch thick, though the Toshiba is a bit thicker. It also has a smaller footprint. The Kirabook has a magnesium alloy body that Toshiba claims is 100% stronger than the aluminum used for the body of the Air.

The Kirabook’s biggest advantage is its hi-res screen. It is almost as sharp as the one on Apple’s higher-end 13-inch laptop, the MacBook Pro with Retina display. That MacBook starts at $1,499 and is $1,699 when configured with the same memory and storage as the Kirabook. The Kirabook’s screen resolution is so high that text can get uncomfortably small. I was forced to use a built-in Toshiba utility to actually lower the resolution a bit for this reason.

The Kirabook has three USB ports to the Air’s two, and Toshiba throws in a two-year warranty, while Apple’s standard warranty is just one year. The Kirabook also has an HDMI port, for easy connection to a TV, which the Apple lacks.

In addition to its high price, the biggest downsides of the Kirabook are Windows 8, whose two very different user interfaces can be confusing; mediocre battery life; and the fact it uses older processors.

By contrast, as of Monday, the MacBook Air uses the latest Intel processors, just out, which promise huge increases in battery life and better graphics. The Kirabooks aren’t due to be upgraded to these new chips till the fourth quarter.

These new processors and battery life are closely linked. Apple claimed this week that, with the new chips, the 13-inch MacBook Air can get up to 12 hours of battery life between charges. That isn’t a typo. (Stay tuned for a review of this revamped Air.)

However, even with the same, older Intel chips, the MacBook Air handily beat the Kirabook in battery life. In my tough battery test, where I turn off power-saving features, keep the Wi-Fi on to collect email and play music until the battery dies, the Kirabook lasted four hours and 27 minutes. The MacBook Air rates over six hours on the same test.

Overall, the Toshiba Kirabook is a very nicely built PC, but for its premium price, it ought to have the latest components, more distinctive design and better battery life.

Email Walt at mossberg@wsj.com.

{ 0 comments }

This story is part of a series exploring the convergence of design, technology, and commerce in the mobile industry. Find out more at MobileBeat 2013, July 9-10 in San Francisco. Read the full series here.

Microsoft Surface with Touch Cover

Jack Gold is the founder and principal analyst at J.Gold Associates.

Rumor has it that Microsoft is thinking about dramatically reducing prices on Windows RT tablets to stimulate sales. Considering the fact that RT hasn’t sold well against the competition, this is not surprising. But I believe this is a wrong approach for Microsoft to pursue for longer term success in tablets.

In tablets, Microsoft has lost its focus. Why does it think it can “dumb down” its OS to please users who have grown accustomed to the features and functions of a full Windows OS experience? If Microsoft believes its OS is not competitive with iOS or Android, it should do something about that directly. And it can’t compete on a direct cost basis with Android at the low end, nor should it try.

The way Microsoft wins is to be seen as a premium brand (like Apple), and not a low-cost solution. It needs to pick a set of features that everyone wants and needs in a tablet, and it needs to make sure they work exceedingly well in full Windows 8, including complete app compatibility (giving away a reduced Office app and limiting backwards compatibility hasn’t been a successful strategy). Additionally, Microsoft needs to create a user experience that no one can fault as being too difficult and/or unfriendly, as well as build a strong brand that appeals to users in the consumer space.

How should Microsoft do this?

Stay with one OS and get rid of RT altogether.
Put all your efforts into making the Windows 8 Pro experience what users want. (Have a tablet version of Windows Home if you must, but keep it fully compatible).
Work with Intel and OEMs to make the Widows 8 tablet price competitive with Android (not at the low-end, but at the mid to high market).
Build incentives for OEMs, as you’ve done in the past with PCs. This will leverage the innovation in the marketplace.
And most importantly, build incentives and community for users with a fast, fully compatible, attractive and well priced device. Surface (not Surface RT) should be the flagship, but it was priced too high and wasn’t clearly defined as to why it was different. It can be the flagship, but it can’t carry the entire market.

Let’s be honest. RT is a reaction, not an innovation. Give users an innovative experience they like and they will come. React to others by incapacitating your experience and they won’t. If Microsoft really believes that Windows 8 is the way of the future, then it needs to stay the course. If it doesn’t, it needs to re-architect and/or redo the OS and move on. The compromises in RT to protect its installed base made no sense.

Microsoft, you are at a major decision point. Where you go is up to you. You still have a lot of good will and users that want you to succeed. Listen to your users, innovate and move forward.

Microsoft can still win a significant share of the tablet market, particularly as it’s still early in the game. But it needs to better define why users want to buy a Windows tablet. It needs to stay true to its vision of one OS (not a complete OS and a badly disabled one). And it needs to work with partners to make the vision real.

Intel now has chips that are competitive on battery life and performance, and at price points that are finally aggressively priced against ARM based chips (Intel’s latest Bay Trail chip based tablets should be $199 according to Intel execs). And OEMs are seizing on that opportunity to build competitive and innovative products. But Microsoft isn’t helping with its mixed messages to the marketplace.

So here’s the bottom line. Microsoft doesn’t really need an ARM based tablet now that Intel has competitive (battery and cost) chips available , and frankly, few users care about the chip inside anyway. Microsoft needs to innovate and supplement — but not by being the “Yugo” of the tablet market with crippled products. A smaller share of higher end and higher quality products is better than a bunch of disillusioned and unhappy users not understanding why some of their apps won’t run.

Android will own the high volume but barely profitable low-end of the market. Microsoft, you should focus on the rest.

Jack Gold is the founder and principal analyst at J.Gold Associates, based in Northborough, Mass. He covers the many aspects of business and consumer computing and emerging technologies.