iPad: Apple Thinks Different

Steve Jobs surprised me today. Although the specifications of the iPad were pretty much what I expected, the device differs in subtle but critical ways from what I and just about everyone else thought it would be. But Apple, as always, has refused to let its plans be shaped by either its fans or its critics and the result is something different and unexpected.

Apple iPadThe general assumption in the runup to the announcement was that the iPad would be a mobile device, bigger than the iPhone or iPad Touch, but still highly mobile. Thus, the obsessive and, as it turned out, mostly irrelevant, speculation about who the mobile carrier would be. Instead, the iPad is really a portable device, by which I mean that it is very easy to carry around, but unlikely to be used while actually in motion.

There is plentiful evidence that this is how Apple views the iPad. One question that  I has focused on was what rabbit Apple would pull out of the hat to enable data input on a mid-sized mobile device. The biggest surprise for me is that they didn’t really try. The on-screen keyboard is only usable if you put the iPad on a flat surface or at least your lap. There’s a microphone, but no provision for voice control.  But there is an optional $70 keyboard dock using the same mechanical design as the iMac keyboard.

It’s hard to say how necessary that external keyboard may be, I have learned that it takes a couple of weeks to assess an onscreen keyboard because each one comes with a fairly steep learning curve all its own. I was able to spend only five or ten minutes typing on the iPad. It’s very different from the iPhone in design, not just size. When you type on the iPhone, the letter you are pressing pops up at the text entry point. On the iPad, the key you are pressing dims, so you have to look at the keyboard rather than the text you are entering. It’s not worse, just different, and will take some getting used to.

Also striking was the emphasis Apple put on the iWork suite of productivity applications.  Word processors, spreadsheets, and presentation programs are not mobile tools, but their availability helps the iPad fit into a market slot, one that does not currently exist,  between laptops and smartphones.

Apple’s choice of wireless technologies was also telling. The iPad is primarily a Wi-Fi device, with the availability of 3G, which unlike Wi-Fi is a truly mobile service, feeling like a  bit of an afterthought. It will be sold the way laptops are, not through the subsidized in exchange for a two-year carrier contract model used to sell phones. With no subsidy, the iPad can be sold unlocked. In the U.S., however, that may not be of great significance. There was no indication of a version that could be used with the CDMA network technology used by Verizon Wireless and Sprint, and if it has the same combination of radios as the iPhone, it would not work properly on T-Mobile’s 3G network. The only data plans announced were for AT&T, $15  for a hopelessly inadequate 250 MB a month, $30 for “unlimited” data service (though nearly all wireless data services turn out to have caps of some sort.)

Also telling is what Apple left off the iPad. There is no dedicated GPS receiver, so the iPad will have to rely on much less accurate network information to know its position (it will be more accurate on 3G versions.) No camera and no compass mean no augmented reality apps. The iPad would be awkward to use as a still or video camera, but I am a  bit surprised that there is no provision for videoconferencing, a use that is consistent with the portability model and the focus on productivity apps.

The area that Apple had the least to say about may ultimately turn out to be the most important to iPad’s success. It looks like a great device for reading books and viewing video. But with relationships between Apple and publishers and studios still in flux, Apple has little to say. The iBook store will put Apple into competition with Amazon.com and Barnes & Noble in the ebook business, but we know next to nothing about the specifics. And for all the talk about the iPad as the future of newpapers and magazines, only a New York Times app was demoed–and it didn’t look all that different from the Time‘s existing Web site or its Adobe Air-based Times Reader for PCs.

Video is problematic for a different reason. Like the iPhone, the iPad does not support Adobe’s Flash video format. When asked about it, Apple executives say they support the new HMTL 5 video standard instead. But Flash is going to remain the video standard of the Web for some time to come (think Hulu; it’s Flash-based and you can’t get it on the iPad). The open question is whether this is the result of a feud between Apple and Adobe or because of the difficulty of running the notoriously processor-intensive Flash systems running ARM processors, which includes the iPad as well as all smartphones. We should get an answer in the fairly near future when Adobe releases the ARM-friendly Flash 10.1.

My guess it the iPad will be successful, though less spectacularly than the iPhone. But if Apple gets the remaining details right, the potential is all to the upside.


9 Responses to “iPad: Apple Thinks Different”

  1. RLCarbonell Says:

    Steve, very well done here. Fast digestion of something difficult to put hands on. Regarding e-book…yes that is probably the best part, but not ready for announcements as you said, but which book/newspaper wouldn’t like to be in it? So far, I see as it could be my second PC at home sitting by my Home Theater…could it substitute AppleTV or an HTPC? Also, when travelling going down to the coast, I could take it with me for doing what we do at the beach house…just web browsing/reading. Still think about Human Input devices, but coming to think of it, the lack of camera and USB connector (for pen-drives, downloading pictures/videos from cameras and other data devices) could be due to the highest priority of keeping the price low for the first version. I’m sure they will add a camera in the next generation, but then again…price could go higher and they will still sell this. Curious how/where people are going to use it apart from games.

  2. Joe Pratt Says:

    I guess I wondering, if its a wifi device primarily, why do I need one….just use my MacBook…..or iPhone……oh well, I must be missing a key element of why it the next Apple Kool thing.

  3. Theo Francis Says:

    Good review. One thing has occurred to me regarding the question of whether there’s room for a device somewhere “between” a laptop and a phone. I’d say there is — largely because the desktop, for many people, has faded into irrelevance. The desktop is the computer at work, if at all; plenty of offices have made docked desktops the norm. Many people (not all, but I would argue, disproportionately the people likely to consider an iPad) use a laptop as their primary computer. So the practical continuum is now laptop–[iPad]–phone rather than desktop-laptop-[iPad]-phone.

    Put another way, the iPad could fill the slot that has been occupied by the laptop — the computer you lug everywhere — only it’s more portable. Laptops become the computer you use at home, but which you can also take on trips (what used to be called a portable).

  4. swildstrom Says:

    Probably the biggest single obstacle to these tweener devices has been software and specifically the user interface. Microsoft’s approach has been to try to cram Windows onto them and it hasn’t worked. The approach favored by Intel and others has been to build some sort of shell on Linux, but these have generally been half-baked efforts that lacked deep understanding of UIs or human-computer interaction issues. While I have some deep reservations about data entry on the iPad, I have the feeling that Apple has gotten the basic UI right.

  5. Roberto Says:

    Theo, I agree with you in regards to many “use a laptop as their primary computer”, BUT the reason people like the laptop is the portability of the basic things people use (email, web browsing, foto, video, etc on the go). On the other hand, a laptop is not the most confortable thing to use… terrible for your neck, very un-ergonnomic. You could have a much more powerful Desktop PC for home for the price of a good Laptop and could do much more…while having a cheaper/lighter device when on the go (leasure more than professionally) like the iPad. Don’t know if I am expressing myself very well, but I think this is just an introducing product for $500. Next generation which could come in June, 2010 (most likely already lined up for production) must have an upgrade, ’cause by then Kindle/Nook will be in color and with video camera…thus higher price…leaving space for the iPad2 to sell at higher price with the camera.

    I use a Desktop at my Home-Office. It is also connected to my HomeTheater. I would love to use the iPad as a HTPC just as a media center and use it as well on the go, but I may not be the typical user.

  6. Theo Francis Says:

    Roberto, that works for me. In that case, the more-powerful desktop would return as the in-between device (now occupied somewhat awkwardly by the uncomfortable laptop and the not-quite-enough smartphone). That makes me wonder whether the success of an iPad segment would slow the development of smartphones as miniature computers — if I’ve got something better that’s almost as portable, why would I do as much as I do on my cramped phone? It’ll be interesting to see.

  7. Rich Says:

    The iPad is sheer intuitive fun, and that generally results in large sales, especially at the iPad’s price point. As a result, sources of content will grow over time.

  8. Roberto Says:

    Theo, I think I am thinking about myself more than an overall industry. In any case, my main point is that the more consumer technology evolves the less we can predict if it will turn out successful once not every product is for everyone at the same time. Consumers should still compare needs with what a Netbook/Notebook/iPad/iTouch can offer and make a proper decision. All other decisions/actions regardless of positive/negative are emotional, not rational and this has been key for all Apple Fans latelly. Personally, I am not a fan of Netbooks/Notebooks for continous use (being PC or Apple). Have seen Kindle and seems nice to use it, but it is limited. iPad makes sense for me.

  9. Neomi Denby Says:

    [..] A little unrelated, but I really liked this site post [..]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: