Thoughts on the iPad
Like most of the Apple faithful, I took my place on the morning of January 27th in front of my screen. I then dialed up one of the faithful live bloggers that were in attendance at the Yerba Buena Center in San Francisco for the big announcement (my choice was Ryan Block from Gdgt) and sat back to enjoy.
As I balanced flipping between work and watching the updates stream in, I also found myself chatting via Skype with an old high school friend (who now lives in Spain) who was also watching the updates. I marveled at what a small world it was and also what a testament it was to Apple to have an announcement like this bring people together from all over the world. Love them or hate them, there is something about Apple that elicits such a strong reaction and you have to agree, not a lot of other companies in our lifetimes have really ever been able to do this.
And with a wave of his hand it came, Jobs strode out in his usual garb and showed off Apple’s latest creation, the iPad. A collective moan (and lots of cheers) rose among the followers and within seconds people speculated at what it could and couldn’t do. Others laughed it off as if this was an SNL/MadTV skit and Steve was pulling our legs holding up a giant iPod Touch. Our greatest reaction was probably to the name, but here are my thoughts on things after having a week or so to digest it all.
How bad is the name really?
All feminine products jokes aside, the name iPad has grown to make sense and not something that will make or break the product. Calling it the iTablet would be a misnomer because the computer market has a “Tablet” category and this product does not fit into that. iSlate dates the product as it conjures up images of a little red schoolhouse. iCanvas puts the product into an “art” or “design” category and isolates it from everyday users. iPad is simply an extremely generic term for something that Apple believes can do everything for everyone. I think it will grow on us and no one will decide not to buy one because they don’t like the name.
Why Apple didn’t make this a true standalone netbook/tablet?
This is very simple and is lost on everyone for some reason. First, netbooks and tablets are simply small/cheap laptops. This falls totally outside the brand image that Apple has created since its inception. Expecting them to create a cheaper/smaller Macbook goes against everything they have ever done, as this would serve to kill their own product line. What they did accomplish was to create another product category altogether that extends their product line instead of cannibalizing it. People can potentially own an iPhone, a Macbook/iMac/Tower, and still want an iPad. From a marketing perspective, it was genius.
Its not the ultimate browsing experience because it can’t run Flash?
Seriously, boo freaking hoo. I simply don’t buy that Flash is the future and I come from agencies that work primarily in Flash and companies that focus on Flash applications. I know Flash is installed on 96% of computers out there and lots of sites use it, but the bottom line is it is not an open standard and it places larger hardware requirements on devices to support it. Flash is processor intensive and (sometimes) a memory hog. It diminishes battery life tremendously and for the new fleet of smaller, slimmer, and utility based devices it is simply not a feasible platform. Flash Lite is a possibility, but then you are just providing a dumbed-down Flash experience… so why bother?
I don’t also believe that HTML5 is the second coming and heck I even spent part of yesterday on an animated SVG demo (yuck), but putting all your eggs in Flash/Silverlight/etc over the long term is a major problem. This proliferates accessibility issues, which now has legal repercussions, and place unnecessary requirements on the hardware.
I am sad I can’t view Flash on the device and I understand it produces some beautiful interfaces, but the lack of support won’t stop the general consumer from buying the iPad.
So will it take down the Kindle?
I sure hope so. The Kindle reminds me of a product that you might have seen 10 years ago except now it runs something fancy called E Ink. Basically you have a premium priced device that is running on cheap hardware, running an embedded OS that supports multiple levels of grayscale. And when you buy this device, you don’t really get a discount on books, so you paid a premium for a device that lets you pay the same amount for what you were doing before. And yes I have used one and we have even given them as gifts, but I would have given an iPad instead had it been available.
Plus, the UI for iBooks is nice (and to the Classics folks, its just a bookshelf and we know you are mad, let it go)…
I do get the argument that your eyes might get tired with the iPad, but I don’t read for more than a few hours maximum and I already stare at a computer screen all day so how much worse will it really be. Plus, you now have the option of beautiful full color artwork from magazines, comics, graphic novels, etc. I can’t wait to see the Panelfly app alone when the iPad comes out. I mean come on, its beautiful.
If I was Barnes & Noble, then I would have pulled the Nook from the market and figured out how to partner with Apple to compete with Amazon.
Multi-tasking?
This is hit or miss with me, when you watch 95%+ of people use their Touch or iPhone they would never know the difference because most apps are single utility. Power users miss it, but the general consumer does not and even finds it confusing. I do think the iPad needs it a lot more than the iPhone or Touch does.
Are Google/Adobe/Microsoft/Nokia lazy like Jobs says?
Abso-friggin-lutely! Let me break this down for you very simply, none of these companies are innovators. You can argue this up and down, but if you look at Apple historically they take risks, sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn’t, but they give it a shot at least. They have lots of failures in their past, but they learn from them and evolve. That is what makes a company innovative.
Google is a company built on acquisitions and throwing stuff into the “Labs” area is not innovation. Its a way to say “hey we are trying this, but aren’t committed to it”. Gmail might be a great product as are the other apps and this by no means says they aren’t doing good things, but they are playing the catchup game. Nexus One = not innovation, its an HTC phone running a new version of Android, not a Google Phone.
Adobe hasn’t done much except when it comes to Flash/Flex/Air. Photoshop and Illustrator seem to just get UI improvements, but functionality hasn’t changed much in the last three versions. Dreamweaver and Fireworks haven’t changed much since they bought it from Macromedia except to make it more Adobe-like. The bottom line is they are resting on their old product lines. Innovation at Adobe could come in the form of workflow management, document sharing, and source/design control. They simply aren’t doing anything new.
Microsoft is the king of wait and see. The only truly innovative product they have is really the Xbox at this point because everything else (Windows 7, Zune, Bing, etc) is just something else you have seen before with a new design. The Xbox itself is now also playing catchup as PS3 gains market share and the companies solution is an “innovative” motion controller (Wii much?). As a company, it is killing them…
And Nokia… seriously? The most innovative thing to hit the domestic market is the new netbook and really, a netbook?
Anything you didn’t like, you freaking fan boy?
I wish it had a front facing camera, oh and put one on the iPhone and Touch as well while you are at it please… also, there is a lot of bezel on there.
The bottom line..
The day after the announcement I was flying back from SFO to PDX and got into talking about it with a guy from Digital Trends (a great PDX based tech news site) and another guy from Sharp. We each had a different feeling about the iPad, but we all agreed that once people got it in their hands and used it, then it could be a game changer. If developers start building apps that extend the iPad, then it becomes a platform in itself.
Many people have had the same experience with the iPhone and Touch. It was hard to figure out the market at first and people were skeptical. Now, it is hard to walk two steps without seeing one. Will the iPad achieve this, who knows? I will definitely be one of the first to try it out though.
