Ever since Apple’s announcement of their new iPad device, there have been a plethora of critical articles and blog posts about how it’s a device that doesn’t measure up. It doesn’t multitask. It doesn’t let you openly install apps. It doesn’t have a USB port or an SD card slot. It doesn’t even run Flash! Above all, the main complaint seems to be this: it’s not really a computer.
What those authors fail to realize is that they are complaining that a drama is not funny, that jazz is not country, and that red is not blue. Fortunately, there have been a few authors who “get it”. There is In Praise of the iPad: A Contrarian View over at TUAW, and The iPad Big Picture over at Daring Fireball. But this post on the Seattle PI, The Apple iPad, explained to geeks (ironically posted on a blog called The Microsoft Blog) is probably the best one I’ve seen on the subject. I think the article sums it up very well in the last few paragraphs, starting at, “All of which brings us to an interesting corollary: I predict that in this decade, we’ll see a split in computing, on the same scale as the microcomputer/mainframe schism of the 1970s.” I think he’s right. I switched to a Mac a few years ago because I finally realized that I was working too hard to get my Windows computer to do what I wanted it to do. As a tech geek, I liked computing so much I didn’t realize I was doing it. But as I got older, and frankly after a good wander through an Apple store, I realized that I had pictures and movies and other work left undone because I was too busy upgrading this component or that component, installing drivers, installing updates, running virus scanners, defragging drives, etc etc on and on and on. And I realized I didn’t like doing that any more. So I bought a Mac, and amazingly most of that maintenance has simply…well, it’s gone away. I don’t have to do it anymore. On the Mac side, anyway. Interestingly, I still have to do some of that stuff on my Windows dual-install (it’s only there for the games, honestly). The dichotomy has never been more clear to me. And I never could have seen it before.
Now, a device like an iPad or even an iPhone – I see that some people are resistant. It can’t multitask. It can’t install open apps. And I’ve complained about that stuff too, because the tech geek still lives inside me. But I much more easily recognize that those are just wishes on my part. Fact is, those are smart moves ultimately. They are not computers. They’re not meant to BE computers. If you want a computer and only a computer, they are not the product for you. Since I have a computer, I’m fine with these products because I don’t need every device of mine to be a computer. So I love my iPhone. It is a lot like a mini-computer, a “handheld” if you will. But the restrictions placed on it are perfectly appropriate given what it really is – a very fancy mobile device. Since I have a computer, I use that for actual computer work. But if I’m browsing the web, answering e-mail, listening to music, looking at pictures or watching movies, I’m quite happy to do it on my iPhone, and I love the mobility of it all. The iPad will be like that times 10.
And that’s all from the perspective of someone who LIKES to tinker with computers. We hard-core computer geeks represent a very small percentage of the population in that regard. Think of the rest of the masses, like our moms and dads, sisters and brothers, grandparents, people who don’t know about the tech side of computers and frankly don’t want or need to know. They just want stuff that works. I’ll recommend an iMac to my mom in a heartbeat. I hesitate to recommend a Windows box, and I know I’d end up working on it for her. She just loves to browse the web and do e-mail – I’d easily recommend a iPad for those purposes. Fact is, she doesn’t really even need a computer, so devices like this are perfect for her.
It’s a different paradigm, but I think it’s a good one. I’d love to have a couchside device that isn’t really a computer, because if all I want to do is shop at Amazon or do some Facebooking, I don’t need a full-fledged computer for that. And I’m glad that I’ve finally hit that realization, after 25+ years of hard-core computing.
It astounds me how many people are attempting to justify or invent purpose for the iPad by marginalizing critics as “geeks”.
If Apple or Jobs were marketing this as some sort of borderline novelty product, or something for users to passively use when they don’t have access (or want access) to a real computer, then your points would be valid. Sadly, though, this is simply not the case.
This is just a situation where a mediocre product has been made that–if created by some non-Apple company–would be touted as a joke. I mean, let’s imagine if Joe Shmo Inc. released a “tablet computer” for a few hundred dollars while retaining harsh proprietary restrictions on the operation of the device. Let’s imagine the backlash that any other company would feel by ignoring some of the most basic fundamentals of tablets (pens, expansion, etc).
If Jobs wants his device to compare with Netbooks, then who are you to claim he was mistaken and say we need to look at the iPad differently? The iPad is an example of Apple’s attitude that it can create pretty much anything and it will be purchased, regardless of its use. Thankfully, people like you invent ways to fabricate scenarios where this would be more than just a momentary gadget interest — I shudder at the thought of taking any other tech advice from you seriously.
And no, I’m not an “apple hater”. I love my MBP and I enjoy my iPhone… but that is because both actually serve their purpose; they don’t require me to lie to myself or others regarding their use.
I also scoff at the fact that they call this a “web-browsing device”. My own net-uses aside, my near-computer-illiterate mother uses sites with Flash nearly daily. This product is useless to her, as it is to any other self-respecting consumer who buys a product for more than a brand.
“Geeks” are those most likely to adhere to the technically detailed computer paradigm.
Shaun says: “If Apple or Jobs were marketing this as some sort of borderline novelty product, or something for users to passively use when they don’t have access (or want access) to a real computer, then your points would be valid. Sadly, though, this is simply not the case.”
Apple is marketing this as a device that fits the user case between an iPhone and a laptop. So you are saying here that you do not believe that?
Shaun says: “This is just a situation where a mediocre product has been made that–if created by some non-Apple company–would be touted as a joke.”
What makes the product mediocre? Is it the hardware? Surely the processor has drawn significant interest from the technical community. Quite simply, it’s blazingly fast. The device is thinner and lighter than any other similarly sized tablet device that I’m aware of. The need for a “pen” as an input device for a tablet computer is subjective. Prior to the iPhone, handheld devices required “pens” (Palm portables, and others.) The iPhones success vindicates the choice of interface.
Shaun says: “If Jobs wants his device to compare with Netbooks, then who are you to claim he was mistaken and say we need to look at the iPad differently? The iPad is an example of Apple’s attitude that it can create pretty much anything and it will be purchased, regardless of its use. ”
The iPad is a transcendent device. It’s something new. The market (and the world) is still trying to wrap it’s mind around what this means. It’s targeted at the same area (the space between phones and laptops) currently owned by netbooks. I suggest that the vast majority of netbook users don’t really want or need a slower, gimped windows laptop. Most of them want a highly mobile way to surf the web, get email. They don’t need a hierarchical file system.
Shaun says: “I also scoff at the fact that they call this a “web-browsing device”. My own net-uses aside, my near-computer-illiterate mother uses sites with Flash nearly daily. This product is useless to her, as it is to any other self-respecting consumer who buys a product for more than a brand.”
I would suggest that there’s nothing on these Flash sites that will not be adequately replace by an analog on the iPad. I’m open to hearing about some specific examples if you can provide them. Keep in mind that the iTunes store is loaded with free games and media, so I’ll not be swayed by video or game sites. Other sites like Google Finance, CNN, Time, or the New York Times have iPhone/iPad specific applications that provide the same (or even enhanced) functionality.
Bottom line – nobody is trying to take your laptop or pc away. The iPad is something different. It’s a new paradigm. Spend a moment and try thinking about what it can do rather than what it’s missing. The prospects are actually pretty exciting…this device may be just be the start of something different and awesome. Simplified media consumption.
Amen, Mr. Kohary. I have an iMac that I use to maintain all my finances and business related data , a 15″ MacBook Pro that I take with me to client offices (and run Windows in a virtual machine), a MacBook Air that I take with me for vacations and trips to my kid’s houses and finally, an iPhone that I like so much I bought 7 of them for family members for Christmas 2007. Like you, I’ve been involved with IT for more years than I care to remember. I WILL be among the first in line to pick up and iPad when they go on sale. It is a game changer and will be the thing I reach for to read the news every morning, look at Doonesbury and other cartoons, do the crosswords and hit the 10 to 20 websites that are part of my daily routine. With the iPad, I’ll be able to do all of this sitting on my couch and drinking my coffee, not tied to my desk.
I’m getting a real kick out of all of the “FAIL!” comments on all of the blogs. I agree with them – there are a lot of people out there who FAIL to understand what Jobs and Apple have just done.