Introduction
Momenta Corporation was known as the first company that developed the design of a tablet computer. Known as a pen top – a touch-sensitive tablet computer operated by means of a pen – it was a revolutionary and innovative technology at the beginning of the 1990s. Nevertheless, regardless of the new design and a promising future, the company has become a failure, even though the proposed technology has become the foundation for modern tablets, including iPads – the first tablets manufactured based on the Momenta’s ideas. Due to the significant influence of the company on the development of the tablet industry, it is essential to study the specificities of the product design (technology assessment) as well as understand major human factors and system limitations that led the corporation to failure.
Technology Assessment
System diagram
The Momenta pentop computer contains several parts – a screen, a pen, and a keyboard. They are connected with wires. The screen is a transflective monochrome device with an option of flip-upping and a 10-inch diagonal axis. Another element is a detachable keyboard for typing in texts and developing spreadsheets. A tethered pen is the last element of the pentop computer. Its specificity is a relatively wide variety of functions and options, including a pen-based word processor, extensions and applications for the pen, and different communication and spreadsheet options. At the same time, the pen can eliminate the limitations of the multi-touch screens, as it can be used for completing information-related operations and controlling the computer. In this way, both pen and keyboard can be deployed for improving user experience and boosting the tablet’s performance (“Momenta Corporation 1/40 Pentop Computer”). See Figure 1 below for getting acquainted with the technological details of the pentop computer.
Human Factors Analysis
For completing the human factor analysis, it is essential to pay special attention to everyone interested in the design and operation of the new product. In the case of the Momenta pentop computer, the assessment will cover three groups of people associated with the product – designers, manufacturers, management, and users.
Designers
Even though the design demonstrated above was a novelty as for the beginning of the 1990s, the industry-wide breakthrough had not occurred due to several gaps ignored by designers. It is evident that the tethered pen was potentially connected to some technical and comfort issues. For instance, making it detachable (like the keyboard) might have helped to minimize the risks of problems caused by wire breakage. At the same time, the very combination of both keyboard and pen in one device is questionable. From this perspective, the functionality of the pen is initially dubious. It means that if the pen worked accurately and relevantly, there would have been no need for offering the keyboard as a component initially provided with the computer, not one purchased for making its operation more efficient or comfortable. Finally, the wiring system is too complicated for the comfortable use of the device, i.e. locating portholes for different components (pen, keyboard, and charger) on three different sides leads to comfort-related issues.
Nevertheless, there are as well some strengths of the product design. For instance, the keyboard and tablet are of nearly the same size that makes carrying the device easier. Furthermore, an opportunity to detach the keyboard is as well beneficial, especially in cases when it is unnecessary or during transportation and carrying the pentop computer.
Manufacturers
In addition to the identified design gaps, manufacturers were as well responsible for the failure of the pentop computer. Even though they used resources available at the market, the hardware was poorly manufactured. The major drawback is a short battery life that means that manufacturers ignored the criticality of searching alternatives for making it longer (for instance, using more energy-saving materials for producing the computer). Moreover, there were issues with a sensitive-touch screen (poor handwriting recognition) that as well points to the fact that manufacturers either failed to find the best materials for their product or could not develop the product properly.
Management
The company’s senior management (including a chief executive officer) paid special attention to PR and marketing instead of improving the design and functions of the product. Therefore, the product was overpriced, and the price-quality ratio was lower than expected. Moreover, senior management ignored the requirements of the market. It means that even though the product was revolutionary, it was too innovative. From this perspective, the market was not ready for accepting it and satisfying the company’s supply needs, i.e. purchasing all products manufactured and offered by the corporation (Einstein).
Users
Even though the design of the new product was innovative and promising, it was not intuitive. It means that it was not available to an ordinary customer. Therefore, a user had to possess particular skills and knowledge in order to operate the machine effectively and maximize its benefits. In addition, most consumers were forced to use a keyboard to type in texts because handwriting options were poorly developed so that there were numerous misprints when people put in information by means of the offered pen. At the same time, the users had to pay special attention to recharging batteries often due to short battery life so that the computer worked while completing important tasks. All in all, regardless of the forward-thinking product design, there was much work left to the user, including the necessity to study how to operate the sensitive-touch device before purchasing it.
System Limitations
Regardless of the revolutionary approach to designing the pentop computer, the system as a whole was a failure. In this case, it is essential to point to the fact that it was the combination of factors that played false with the corporation. The primary system limitations were implicitly identified in the human factor analysis above. Still, they should be indicated directly. To begin with, even though the tablet was underpowered, at the same time, it was overpriced. In this case, attention should be paid to both battery life and technological gaps combined with inefficient management strategies. From this perspective, due to the limited technology development (overall technological issues in the industry), handwriting recognition software was operating poorly. More than that, it pointed to significant screen-related issues, i.e. inadequate sensitive-touch options (“What Is the Chasm and How Do You Cross It?”). All in all, the major limitations were associated with ignoring the readiness of the market to accept the product. It means that it might have been possible to avoid system limitations if the company operated in the field of technology that has been already approved and used by ordinary customers, i.e. did not require them to obtain new knowledge in order to enjoy the new product (Moore).
Works Cited
Einstein, David A. “The Magic of Failure.” SFGate, 1998, Web.
“Momenta Corporation 1/40 Pentop Computer.” RICM, 1991, Web.
Moore, Geoffrey O. Crossing the Chasm: Marketing and Selling Disruptive Products to Mainstream Customers. 3rd ed., HarperBusiness, 2014. Google Books.
“What Is the Chasm and How Do You Cross It?” Product Strategy, 2008, Web.