Well, there’s one great thing about Apple’s new iPad…
I, for one, am no longer Apple’s bitch. I watched the keynote and I firmly do not see myself getting an iPad. I’m sure many of you feel the same way.
I mean, I really just don’t see it. Steve Jobs had said that Apple would never make a Netbook, and he thinks the idea of a “toilet browser” is atrocious.
So instead, they set out to fill a gap between the iPhone and the Macbook… or more generically, the gap between a smartphone and a laptop.
Um, correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t the definition of a Netbook?
Moving on, the iPad doesn’t seem to have any more capability than an iPhone or iPod Touch. It’s not more-connected. It doesn’t have any apps that the iPhone doesn’t. Granted, the apps it has are probably easier to use than those on the iPhone. And there will be forthcoming apps. But in the end, it’s just a bigger iPhone, for browsing on the couch or other seated position.
Um, isn’t that a toilet browser?
I was firmly hoping for something that wouldn’t fill the gap, but instead bridge it. But I am sorely disappointed. Anyone who already has an iPhone and a Macbook (Pro), such as I do, is probably saying, “well, there’s several hundred dollars I can keep in my pocket.” It’s just a less-portable iPhone and a far-less-powerful Macbook.
So, I don’t know about the rest of you, but here’s my dilemma. I would love it if you all could tell me if I’m in the majority or if I’m the only person in this situation. I work for a company that has its own infrastructure and doesn’t want or like “foreign” objects on it’s backbone. In other words, I can’t use my personal devices on the company LAN. It’s an obvious security hole. Furthermore, my company is not about to buy me an iPad or similar device, saying that I have what I need to do my job. So if I want a device, like the iPad for instance, to help me do my job better (easier? faster?), it will come out of my pocket. But it will still not be allowed on the LAN.
So, I have to ask… who is intended for the iPad? It’s not me, the business set, who would like something that I could take notes on, view my calendar in real time on, check emails and receive them in real time, view documents while away from my desk… and with only a soft keyboard (no stylus), I may as well be using my iPhone for all of this.
But the iPhone is obviously not well-suited to this task. I frequently will take meeting documents, drop them in DropBox (don’t tell my IT guys that I got DropBox working on my machine… pleeeeeeease!), and then view them on my iPhone in the meeting. Very “green” of me, right? But then what happens if I need to take notes? No multitasking means I’m stuck writing on a pad of paper, or else closing out the document.
Apparently, the iPad has no multitasking either… what is it with that? In the end, it doesn’t even come close to scratching my itch for a product to do these things. Maybe I would need 3 or 4 iPads with me at all times… one with a spreadsheet open, another with the meeting agenda open, a third for taking notes, and a fourth in case I have to look something up. Yeah, that must be Apple’s plan.
I guess I’d better keep on saving up…
What about the rest of us? I have an iMac at home, and I need a mobile device to get the internet to the couch (email, surfin’, writing small texts). The iPhone is too small, and a MacBook would be so powerful (and expensive) that this would replace my iMac. I don’t want to run into trouble like “Where have I stored the latest version of this spreadsheet? At the iMac or the MacBook?” And here comes the iPad: smaller than a MacBook, small enough to carry it with me on various occasions. Powerful enough to work on emails and texts, everywhere. I think I would love it.
Well, you have a point… those among us who don’t have a laptop might find this a suitable replacement.
But I doubt it. Seriously… so far, all we’ve seen is basic Netbook-type functionality. Sure, it’s prettier (which you’ll pay more for) and it’s Apple (which you’ll pay more for), but in the end, it boils down to a couch/toilet browser/emailer.
For a few hundred more, you can get a Macbook. For less, you can get a Windows 7 Netbook.
For about the same price (or even less, depending on options), you can get an HP slate, or an ExoPC: http://www.exopc.com/fr/exopc-slate.php
As long as the interface is usable (which is a big IF, I understand), I’d take a full Win7 tablet over the iPad any day.
But I do understand your point… not all of us have needs/desires outside what the iPad delivers. Not all of us wish to write programs, rip DVDs and CDs, watch Flash video (bazinga!), play Flash games, read books in a format other than Apple’s ordained format, annotate PDFs, take notes, use a stylus, etc.
But then again, many of us do…
-Mike
Hallo Michael,
Well, I don’t see the iPad as a replacement for a MacBook, certainly not. But it could be the easy-to-use mobile device for all the things we want to do everywhere – and that’s communication and social interaction, and not DTP, CAD, programming. I would agree with you up to a point – it’s a couch browser, emailer, a photo album, yes, but what kind of a photo album: Watch your grandma when you hand over the iPad to her, and she can just switch from photo to photo like turning pages of a book. I bet she’ll love it.
This will never work with a netbook or a laptop for two reasons: the UI which makes this device so different from any other computer, and because you can’t hold a netbook with only one of your hands. You always need both hands, or you place it on the table, your lap. It looks like a machine, not a photo album.
Something like the iPad can be handled like a book, not like a computer. That must be a terrific experience, even for us, the computer addicted people. I certainly remember the moment when I touched a mouse for the very first time (1986, it was an Atari!). Before that we had to interact with a computer by cryptic commands, and suddenly almost everybody was able to control a personal computer. Now with the iPad we get a powerful device with a touchscreen – this is again a paradigm shift! The iPad will – most likely – extend the reach to the rest of the people which still refuse to work with a computer (like my mom). You wold never get them with a Win7 machine.
The iPad hasn’t been designed for the computer nerds and geeks. It’s target group is the rest of us (the “early majority”, not the “early adopters”). Therefore it’s hard to argue with technical features (no multitasking, no DVD, you name it), because the target group isn’t interested in this discussion: “I don’t care about the microprocessor, as long as there is an Apple around”. The discussion is an emotional debate. You like it, or you don’t like it – that’s it.
And honestly, a computer doesn’t have to be an awful box. I love beautiful things – why can’t a computer be a ‘beautifully’ thing? People have an emotional relationship to many things like cars, books, watches, and the pay a lot for a new bicycle.
Nobody has to buy the iPad, but obviously many want to. The customers will decide about the success of the iPad, not Steve Jobs. I doubt that Apple will sell as many iPads than iPhones, but for me it’s clear that this will become a success story.
Yes, usually we have to pay more for an Apple device than for devices from other vendors. But don’t we get something more from Apple than a piece of hardware? They have again invented a new type of computer (after the Mac, iPod, and iPhone), and we as customers will decide if this will be a success, or if it is technology crab. For me the iPad could be the perfect complement to the desktop computer. Let’s see what happens if can touch one
- Andreas
You have excellent points… but I think you’re missing one little detail… what you’re talking about is the UI, not the device as a whole.
Sure, the iPad will be successful… because it’s Apple… and Apple is sexy. Period. That doesn’t mean it’s the superior platform.
Your comments about Windows 7 are, to me, unfair. It is imminently possible to put a gorgeous and user-friendly UI on a Win7 platform… it’s just that no one’s done it yet. But it’s still, technically, possible.
As for Netbooks… I see your point. But what if the form factor were like the iPad (read: multitouch and tablet-style)? Slap on a good UI and a handful of useful apps, and boom! You’ve got everything the iPad is plus everything it’s not.
You are 100% correct, though… this is an emotional debate. Do I want an iPad? You betcha! Am I gonna get one? Probably not… especially if I can find something else that serves my purposes better for around the same price. As much as I love my iPhone, I do envy the Nexus One users who can do FAR more with their phones than I can.
In the end, I can’t see the iPad as a complement to a desktop machine. If the syncing were more free (read: wi-fi) and if I didn’t have to plug it in periodically to move things back and forth, then I might see it as more of a way to free myself from the desktop tether.
-Mike
Sure it is technically possible to build a “gorgeous and user-friendly UI” on top of Win7. But would that be like an iPad? No, definitely not. It’s not only the UI – it’s the whole device. You need software and hardware, especially designed, to create such an innovation.
In my opinion no one will be able to do so. Why? Well, hardware vendors like HP or others will never create such a thing like the iPad. They focus on the hardware, and they compete on the technical level (and the price). They have to build a better computer, a better laptop, and innovation like the netbook is rare.
On the other hand Microsoft doesn’t care about hardware. They want to sell their OS, and that’s why they need the hardware vendors. Their OS must versatile – compatible with all available hardware and a platform for all kind of software. It would be hard for MS to change the UI paradigm because trillions of software vendors depend on the Windows paradigm.
Real innovation (the paradigm shift) needs symbiotic innovation in hardware and software, but neither MS nor the hardware vendors can do that. They have different interests, they will never build things like Apple can do that. Maybe Google or mobile phone vendors could be able to create innovation? I would appreciate this.
- Andreas
Sorry, but I have to disagree… if the hardware was similar in speed and capability to an iPad and the UI was just as good as an iPad, it would be very difficult to make a decision. And, only patents keep someone from copying the UI exactly.
Now, I will agree that it’s probably NOT going to happen. Although HP is trying to create an app store and such for their slate, I doubt they will be able to create a soup-to-nuts solution like Apple does.
But I have to say, as much as I appreciate how well Apple stuff works together (most of the time), I am starting to feel the pinch of their my-way-or-the-highway attitude. Sure, the iPhone is a good phone… but what if I wanted to use Google Voice? Whoops! And why is Apple so petty about the use of the hardware? I am speaking of the deal where Amazon (who bought Lexcycle, makers of the Stanza ebook reader) had to update their iPhone reader app to STOP using the USB cable for book syncing. I mean, what the heck is that all about? Every other phone out there allows apps to utilize nearly any part of the phone’s hardware. But not Apple… and that stunts the growth of the device, in my opinion.
And that’s when it’s easy for other players in the same space to come along and make something that could woo away Apple’s customers. As I’d indicated, I would really like to have a Nexus One… dang AT&T contract!
But I guess the proof is in the pudding. If Apple can keep a lid on the iPhone and iPad, then as time goes on, the competitors will probably see a lot of issues appear (viruses, etc.) as a result of their openness.
Time will tell…
-Mike