[rant] For the answer of what works in portable computing, one need only take a few plane rides across the country. During one of your visits to the restroom, take a glance down the rows and see what business types are using to get work done while on the run. You're likely to see a fair share of Toshibas, HPs, and Dells decorating the refreshment trays -- you're unlikely to see handheld computers.

Microsoft was shooting for major "Gee Whiz" with their release of the portable version of Windows, Windows CE. I'm going to completely ignore the fact that Windows CE sports portable versions of Word, Excel, and Internet Explorer, I'm also going to forget the 90+ vendors who are signed up to develop for the operating system. What matters to me is Microsoft's track record.

Because of its size and wealth, Microsoft has great seats in the technology arena. Their position allows them to sit back, let a market mature, and then conveniently borrow all relevant ideas and incorporate them into their product which is backed by the inherent clout of Microsoft. The key to this plan is that the market must be successful, therwise, why invest?

Why handheld computers? If you run with the techie crowd, think about your friends. In the past five years, I guarantee one of them has gotten the hand-held computing bug, the most recent example being U.S. Robotics' Pilot. The friend is all praise for the newest toy, invariably showing off the handwriting recognition or the slick stylus. Then, two weeks later you'll never hear about it again.

Hand-held computers have yet to integrate themselves into our daily lives. The advantage of having our own private stash of bits nearby doesn't outweigh the fact that no one wants to carry a wallet sized computer around for longer than it takes them to show close friends how cool it is. So, what is with the Microsoft portable computing push?

Who knows? The war chest of Microsoft is full and even if Bill Gates doesn't pound Netscape into the ground, they're likely to profit considerably from the Internet push. So, why not try to pour some of that money into developing new markets before they dominate them?

[rant] November. Famous for two events, Thanksgiving and Comdex. Both are eagerly anticipated and both leave you bloated and wondering why you cared so much in the first place.

Comdex was an annual event for me for five years until I realized that careful attention paid to PC Week and Infoworld could replace Comdex attendance. However, it remains the time of year that hi-tech companies expose plans for the future.

This year, Netscape's Jim Barksdale previewed a future product code-named Constellation as "an easy-to-use, powerful workspace that lets you customize, focus, and automatically receive the information you care about." The application replaces your desktop with an easy to use interface laden with customizable information and, according to Netscape, Constellation will be supported on all the platforms supported by the Navigator. This fact alone will have I.S. directors drooling, "Finally! One desktop to support!" It's a novel idea, but it's already confusing the market.

Netscape Communicator 4.0 (the recently redubbed Navigator) has yet to even hit the streets in Beta form and Barksdale is already talking about next generation technology. The spin is that Constellation is a "component" in the Communicator suite of applications, but why wasn't Constellation announced as part of the Communicator suite weeks ago?

As a developer who uses Netscape products, I would be confused. Do I wait for Constellation to be a part of the latest and greatest? Or do I dive into Communicator when it arrives hoping for a smooth migration to Constellation? Confusion about intention drives developers away from a product line and Netscape's pre-announcement mania is creating a confusing montage of possible futures.