Thoughts on iPad

Since last Wednesday, there has been a lot of buzz regarding the Apple iPad. Some of it has been positive, some of it not so much. Some regard it as the next step in computing, while others have dismissed the device as a “giant-sized iPhone“. I have decided to respond to a number of these comments. Many of the headers I am responding to come from this iPad” article.

Look at the History

Before I get into specifics, I want to look at the history that gives some perspective of where this product may be heading. In September 2007, Apple released the iPod Touch to complement the iPhone that was announced in January 2007. Many dismissed this product at the time because it was an “iPhone without the phone” and many did not see the purpose of the product. However, when people look at the way the product developed over time, it has now become extremely popular. One of the major killer-apps that led to its popularity was the App Store, which made the iPod Touch wildly successful as a useful appliance and gaming platform. It also was wildly appealing because it did not require a contract with AT&T, allowing users to take advantage of the apps on the iPhone without having to have the cost of an iPhone.

Now, let’s look ahead to the iPad. Much of the reception that it has received is very similar to the iPod Touch. What one needs to understand is that the introduction of the iPad is not meant to be the end-all be-all with its introduction. It is the introduction of a platform that is meant to be taken forward by developers and users. I believe that Apple is also hoping to create a new way that we interpret how we use our computer, it rather being an appliance rather than having to use all of the metaphors of computers we have had to use for the last 30+ years. Apple does not want to just put Mac OS X on a tablet like Windows 7 on a tablet, it wants to redefine the entire interaction and experience.

It is a Platform

The iPad is not meant to be the end-all tablet, it is meant to be the beginning. Apple is building a new platform for people to put applications that leave behind the limitations of mouse-based computing, leave behind the frustrations of understanding computer hierarchies and other components. It is supposed to be a higher level platform a step above the operating systems that concentrates more on the experience of you using the device rather than looking at it as a computer.

Apple chose to build on top of its iPhone platform instead of the desktop Mac OS X. There are many reasons for this. First, the iPhone was designed for the beginning as a touch-based interface, while the desktop would be adapted to touch. Its entire interface and all of its applications were all designed for mouse/keyboard-based interaction. Apple has also been able to develop a developer-based that are becoming familiar with the unique advantages of multi-touch. By forcing applications to be written for the device, it is pushing developers who are investing in it to take advantage of the technology, rather than simply port an application.

This differs from the Windows 7 tablet strategy, in which it is a full version of Windows. This allows developers to be lazy, being able to say “well, I can run the application on here” without optimizing it for a tablet. Many applications are designed to be used with a mouse, not taking advantage of any of the benefits of multi-touch. One would then ask “well why don’t they allow both?” Apple‘s reasoning for that is by forcing developers to design for the platform, it is pushing progress as opposed to allowing things to stay stale. This is arguably one of the reasons since 2002 that Microsoft was never able to get tablet computing to take off.

It is an Appliance

For years, the comparison of different devices has been based on specifications of the computer. People would judge the quality of a computer based on whether it had a faster processor, more RAM, hard drive space, etc. But computers are getting to the stage where the specifications matter less and less and people should be concentrating more on what the user experience they are receiving, rather than what the numbers say.

So on that note, who cares if Apple is using an A4 processor as opposed to Intel? If when you use the device it responds the way that you want it to, does it really matter what’s running it? That’s the thought process that Apple is trying to push customers towards. Don’t worry about how the computer is working underneath, just worry that the computer is functioning the way that you want to and your interaction with the device is satisfying in getting what you want, as opposed to concentrating on how it is doing that.

No Camera

I will admit, it would be very cool to have a front-facing video camera to be able to video conference wherever I am. There have even been rumors that there is a slot in the chassis of the iPad to contain a webcam. This would be extremely cool. At the same time, this isn’t really a deal breaker for me. While I like having the iSight built into my MacBook Pro, how much do I REALLY use my webcam? It is something that may be nice to see in time, but I question whether this is as much of a horrendous absence as people claim it to be.

As for a front facing camera, I really don’t see much value in it. Yes, there are definitely ways this could be useful, but the form factor of the iPad doesn’t really make it seem it would be comfortable to take a front-facing picture, so is it really necessary for it to have?

Another reason that I believe that Apple has not placed a camera on here is because Apple wants to create a device that is able to function equally when it is vertical and when it is horizontal. By placing a standard camera, the location of the camera would change as the device is flipped. The only way to reduce that is if the camera was in the center of the screen, which is a technology that Apple is working on. Much in the philosophy of Apple, when they introduce that technology on the device, they want to make sure that they do it right and they are able to support the technology in full.

I give some merit to the back-facing camera, but not to the front. I do believe though that ti will come in time.

Big, Ugly Bezel

Does anyone ever wonder why there is a margin in books? The main reasons for a margin is because you have to hold the book and it would be poor design to have the text content covered while I am trying to read a book. In addition to that, it gives space from the content inside from the content of your outside environment. The reason the iPhone does not have this bezel is because it is able to be held with one hand by having the whole hand behind the device. This is not as simple for something the size of the iPad. It would require more front support. While I can see where people are coming from, this decision was very conscious for usability.

No Multi-tasking

This is something that I will give a little be of credit to. I have been jealous for a while the ease of multi-tasking on the Palm Pre. At the same time, I also understand Apple‘s philosophy in trying to reduce the amount of energy that device needs to use.

One thing I keep in mind, however, is that the iPad is currently running iPhone OS 3.2. This means that they are using the OS that is currently out on the market. Apple has historically released updates to its iPhone OS during the WWDC during the summer, which suggests that some of these software-based updates may indeed be in the next version of the iPhone/iPod/iPad OS. So I am not going to count this out this summer.

Touch keyboard

Touch technology isn’t going away. There are so many advantages to touch keyboards, one of them being that input is no longer restricted to the conventions of a QWERTY keyboard, and instead are able to be optimized specifically for a software application. This opens potential for the software to take new functionality that may have been limiting on a keyboard. As for typing, get used to it. One of the things I have found with the iPhone is you learn to be able to touch type on it and able to depend on some of its auto-correcting type.

On that note, however, I think some of the technology Apple has been investigating that would give tactile feedback to the user would definitely be cool, but it doesn’t bug me so much in this device.

Adapters

It appears that a lot of extended functionality on the device is done via adapters. While this may seem inconvenient for people, it calls into question how much you use these. For a good portion of the use of the device, you are most likely not going to be using a VGA adapter or a camera adapter. For the small percentage of time I will be using those, I can deal with the inconvenience of carrying very small adapters and in exchange not having to carry absolutely everything with me, but instead carry most of what I need most of the time. It makes the device lighter and less clunky for stuff that honestly I won’t use as much as I think I will.

No T-Mobile

Would you really be that much happier on T-Mobile? People are complaining that it is only available on AT&T because of its hardware configuration, but I that highlights less of what Apple‘s problem is and more a problem with the US Carriers. T-Mobile, AT&T, Verizon and Sprint all use proprietary technologies that are only available on their network. Most of the world runs on GSM, which means it was a logical move to adapt the technology accordingly. Because T-Mobile runs on its own version of GSM, it limits them from using this device as well as many other European devices. Would it be worth it to Apple the additional cost to add support for T-Mobile? No, probably not for the customers it will get from that. What about Verizon? That is an argument that is more valid, but not T-Mobile.

App Ecosystem

Hardcore techies and developers are not going to like what I have to say about this: it pushes developers to conform to new interface conventions. Developers are lazy. So many developers would rather use what they are comfortable with rather than take the time to take advantage of some new technologies. It is for this reason that Apple did not just put a version of Mac OS X on the tablet. Microsoft is offering Windows 7 on tablets, but that’s the problem. It means that developers are just able to run their applications on a tablet that weren’t designed for touch interfaces, rather, mouse-based interfaces. Apple pushing these restrictions pushes developers to innovate and try new things with the features provided by the iPhone SDK / iPad SDK. By just opening basic support for Mac or desktop applications, it isn’t going to push innovation in interface design and keep the world of computing stuck within the “windows”-based interface that is designed for mouse-based devices. Apple is helping the industry move forward, and bringing new life to a stale market.

Don’t Judge the People Who Use It

There are some people out there that are going to say “well, if you use this then you are dumb.” Just because you use a device that concentrates on the experience of how you use it and not on your intelligence. If it spends more time for you to do something on your computer because you are having to concentrate on many more variables, then good for you. You exhausted more energy doing it. Computers were meant to make things easier for humans, not unnecessarily complicated. If a computer is programmed in such a way that it makes it easier, is that so wrong?

The Audience

There have been many people that have mentioned that they wouldn’t buy an iPad, and that is okay. It may not be what you need for now. The iPad is designed in between an iPhone and a laptop. Are you able to do these things on a laptop? Absolutely. The question is not with that though. How do you enjoy the way you get that stuff done is part of it, the other part of it is that you are able to take what you need with you as opposed to too much.

No Adobe Flash

Steve Jobs made a very bold move in stating that Apple is not going to support Adobe Flash on the iPhone/iPod/iPad platform. This has been the point that many have mentioned when speaking to people, and this is one that I have felt people are overly worried about. Many of the people who are making these complaints are also many of the people who are not using a mobile device that has Apps. The model that Apple (as well as Google Android, Blackberry, etc) is to push away from the browser from most of your internet needs and rather have Apps that do what you want them to do. This allows the user to instantly gain exactly what they want by launching an app, as opposed to opening up a web browser. It also allows users to have functionality that may not be available in a browser.

So what does this mean for Flash? Steve Jobs has stated that the internet is moving towards HTML5. While some may seem this as a little early, it is the same policy that they have been pushing with app development: “adapt to the specs or be left out of the mobile computing market”.

Look at what many people use Flash for. The first obvious one is video like YouTube. Even Google and Vimeo announced that it is now testing HTML5 remove dependency on Flash, which is an excellent move. HTML5 supports video through MPEG4, removing the dependency on Flash. Next, people use Flash for games. Adobe Flash Builder 4 allows for the conversion of applications to iPhone apps, allowing developers of Flash games to port their games to iPhone, allowing any popular games to move over, removing the need for Flash within a browser for that reason. Next, for rich interfaces. Well, JavaScript has been catching up with many of the components people have depended on Flash for. In addition to that, additional rich interfaces on mobile devices may want to have custom applications for the mobile platform.

Apple has also argued other reasons for it not willing to allow Flash on the iPhone/iPad. First is that it is resource-heavy. This is a very valid argument in many ways: just watch your CPU Meter when a large Flash application is running in your browser. The second is that it is buggy. Steve Jobs has stated it is one of the biggest reasons for a browser crash on a Mac. The final is that it is a proprietary standard that is governed by Adobe, a company that in my opinion is not one I like to depend on, but that is another conversation.

So does the mobile platform need Adobe Flash? I don’t think so. I think the mobile world would be a better place without Adobe. It is indeed a bold statement for Apple to not support it in its mobile platform, but it may be a stance that has paid off. Apple has had a history of pushing technologies including DVI, USB, AAC, MPEG4, Ethernet, 802.11, and many others.

It is Not a Laptop Replacement

Contrary to the comparisons that Steve Jobs has made that “netbooks don’t do anything better”, I don’t see the tablet as a laptop replacement. When Steve Jobs introduced the iPad in his keynote, he placed it in between the iPhone and the laptops, which I think it is an accurate place to place it. It may not have all of the functionality of a netbook at this time, but give it time. As developers start to look at how they can take advantage of the technologies in the iPad, there will be ways that users can interact on an iPad that just are not possible on a netbook. Where this edge will grow is Apple‘s push for developers to utilize the technologies in the iPad as opposed to simply porting applications from the desktop system. This is something that could potentially also give it an edge over many of the tablets as well.

Clever Plan with AT&T

I think Apple‘s pre-paid plans it arranged with AT&T were extremely smart. It allows a user like me, who will most likely not always need to use the 3G internet, to turn it on and off at will. I may know I am going to be traveling for the next 3 weeks, so I definitely want it to be on, but most of the time when I am at home and work I don’t want to pay for it. This is great for the people that aren’t very committed or do not need the 3G all of the time.

It Doesn’t Compete with My iPhone

My iPhone is something that I take with me everywhere. It is my cellphone and my communication device. An iPad, however, is something that I wouldn’t take everywhere, but allows me to do more than my iPhone and meet the needs that I usually use a laptop for, and allow me to carry some of the books that I have to carry in my bag now. If I am able to have my entire backpack in my iPad, then that reduces significantly what I need to carry with me. I need more functionality than my iPhone, but I don’t need all the power and weight of my laptop.

Will I Buy One?

My answer is: eventually. Although there is part of me that would love to buy one as soon as it comes out, I am going to wait, partly for financial reasons, and partly because I also want to wait to see what Apple releases for the next iPhone. Would I give up my iPhone for an iPad? No, but some of the announcements for the iPhone may reflect some of the functionality for the iPad.

Additional Reading

The following are a number of articles that I have collected that may be an interesting read for some of you that are tracking the progress of the iPad in the media.

• Why Apple Could Have Etched “iPad” Into Some Rocks and Sold Millions
• Flash is Doomed: Warnock is Afraid to Call Jobs

UPDATE (02/02/2010): Added Additional Reading Section