I think this is actually a fairly even-handed look at the potential (both positive and negative) of the iPad. Even if the iPad is simply the spark that kicks off the touch-tablet craze (iphone to nexus one anyone?) - it's still a significant game-changer.
Will it displace desktops and laptops? Not for people who use them to get work done. Anyone writing a book probably won't use an iPad - nor will someone writing software, or doing accounting/etc. It will, however, one day replace the things "most" people use computers for - consuming media, articles, videos, writing short blogs, etc.
At it's heart - it's a consumption device with some capabilities of creating. The content creation capabilities will simply get stronger with time (UX mockup tools, Keynote/presentation tools, sketching applications, etc). As the tablet/touch-interface market expands and more companies get in the game, things will only get better. More tablets will come, more 3rd party hardware addons will come - creators will be enabled.
Do I wish it ran OSX-Full, instead of iPhone OS? Yes, but while I wish that, I also see the fact that using an OS designed for a touch-based system is superior than a normal OS with touch-based interactivity "bolted on".
Anyone doubting how intuitive and natural a touch-based system is to work with should try handing an iPhone to a two year old. They can figure it out much more quickly than a mouse and keyboard. My poor daughter (my guinea pig) can pick up my iphone, switch screens, find and start her game(s) in seconds. She's still flummoxed by my laptop/touchpad and the little mouse icon on the screen.
To me, the question isn't whether it'll replace desktops and laptops, but whether it'll replace paper. I'm not interested in an iPad as a laptop replacement, let alone a desktop replacement. I'm interested in whether I can carry one around instead of various notebooks, magazines, textbooks and so on.
Touch-based is an important consideration. I find it impossible to use a laptop when standing up, e.g. on the train. I can, however, write in a notebook, read a book or what-have-you.
I hadn't thought of it as a replacement to paper - that's actually pretty interesting a concept. Have you seen the show Caprica on Sci-Fi? They actually use thin sheets of "something" (looks like paper) as a computer - so maybe your thought is more apt than my idea of drawing the laptop-to-tablet idea.
"Even if the iPad is simply the spark that kicks off the touch-tablet craze (iphone to nexus one anyone?) - it's still a significant game-changer."
Great point. I disagree about the iPad not being good for writing books. Won't Incase or Mophie come up with a $100 keyboard/case that turns this into a laptop? I think the app ecosystem will be greatly augmented by a hardware eco-system. I'm bullish on the platform.
Later in that comment I pointed that out - content creators will be enabled by third-party add ons, and other companies building "competitors" which further enable creation. I don't think that there is anything blocking creation on it - just that that's not the short-term aim.
And in that; nothing is blocking apps aimed at creators from the app store. Day one will see a new version of Pages and Keynote and at least one artist/painter/sketching application.
The applications will make or break the device ultimately.
I doubt a third party keyboard will change things.
I'm amazed how much the success or failure of sophisticated computer products depends on their default configuration - this would seem especially true in Apple space where the reason to pay Apple's hefty prices is "it just works", not "it works once you go out and buy an accessory that you now have to carry around and worry about loosing or breaking".
I'm going to start calling this claim that "its-the-computer-for-most-people-since-most-people-don't-seriously-use-computers" fallacy.
Even if what most people use a computer for doesn't seem serious, they do it seriously and don't want to have to stop doing it after ten minutes because their machine is completely unergonomic (the Ipad is 1.5 pounds, trying holding that with one hand http://www.apple.com/ipad/specs/)
Just as much, if you peel students, office workers, tech professionals and artists away from "everyone", you've got a smaller "everyone" than you'd think (especially office workers). A lot of people don't do that much word processing on their machines. But a lot of people would unhappy if they couldn't do any word processing on their machine.
The Internet has been more successful than any walled garden because people's needs are actually more varied than concept "consumer-end" allows for. I expect the Ipad's failure to reinforce this concept.
Ok but if we're inventing fallacies then I'm going for "every-device-must-fulfil-all-your-needs" fallacy. I don't think iPad like devices are for average people, I think they're for just about everyone. It won't replace every computer usage, but rather than people rueing having to use these simple limited devices they'll be rueing having to boot up their big ugly expensive machines.
That's relatively close for why I'm buying one - I don't want a laptop replacement. I want something more portable that does "just enough" of what I need and want to do on the go.
To quote someone else in the thread later on: "Because no one ever held a book steady in their hand for more than 15-20 minutes without getting tired..."
I will be very interested to hear real-world feedback about the usage patterns and ergonomics of it as people really use it - and people will, including tech people, writers, bloggers, etc.
I'm always re-adjusting when I do long-term reading, every 15-20 minutes at least. My arms do get tired, I start laying down, rest the book on the mattress/couch and just hold the page open, but then the arm gets tired and you have to roll over and do the same with the other arm. It's arduous work, reading is.
And that's with paperbacks. This thing is 1.5 pounds.
Apple does have a history of entering markets ripe for explosion and then facilitating that explosion. It seems a bit different this time. In the past it seems the Apple was answering consumers' demands rather than publishers' demands. Portable music sold one at a time came to the delight of consumers and the detriment of the music industry. The iPhone's internet connected apps encourage using more and more bandwidth is to the detriment of cell phone carriers. Consumers outside of tech geeks and Apple fans seem to care less about tablets. It is the publishers who pine for a new platform to sell the wares on that seem to be the most vocal about how revolutionary the iPad is. Even friends that have pre-ordered it do not exactly know what they will be doing with it yet, only that the iPad is somehow revolutionary. Time will tell if the iPad will be a success but I personally hope a more open platform will win out.
There's "no demand" for a simple, easy to use tablet-sized internet/app device that doesn't crash, just like there was "no demand" for a simple, easy to use, pocket-sized music device 10 years ago.
There's plenty of demand for it. Most people just don't know they want one yet. As I argued in my article after the iPad launch, people who don't actually want a computer will be buying this in droves (instead of wasting money on ugly, powerless netbooks - which are priced in the same region!).
There was demand for a pocket-sized music device over 20 years ago. The Sony Walkman was a success which was followed by the proprietary Sony MiniDisc format which flopped. Then iRiver and Phillips had crappy mp3 players. The iPod was the first portable music player since the Walkman that was a success.
I am not prescient, the iPad may be a huge success, but there currently not a large market for tablets. There were large markets for portable music players and smart phones when Apple entered those fields.
I want one. ... It has a nice 9.7-inch screen, weighs only one and a half pounds, and can play movies for 10 hours on a single battery charge. Right away I could see how I would use it. I'd keep it in the living room to check e-mail and browse the Web. I'd take it to the kitchen and read The New York Times while I eat breakfast. I'd bring it with me on a plane to watch movies and read books.
I also pre-ordered, but I will note that I do all of the above with my rather old tc1100 tablet. (A p4 just barely squeaks by with video.) Even now, I'm posting to HN from bed using the phenomenal Windows XP Tablet handwriting recognition.
The iPad will change everything not because it's new. It will change everything because of its execution.
Precisely. The point people need to realize is that having a well-executed, easy-to-use touch-based interface is the killer feature of the iPad. That "shiny user interface" is the point of it.
Excuse my ignorance and non-appleness for this simple, non-technical, potentially stupid question:
While my 13" MacBook Pro rests on my knees, I can smoke with one hand, hold my coffee in the other hand, and read this article at the same time. I started it in the kitchen and finished in the bedroom.
How is iPad going to make my life better? Will I be able to do 3 things at a time with it? I suspect one hand will always be busy holding the thing. It will get tired, let alone that I won't be able to smoke and have my coffee and read an article (and always have the UNIX shell at hand) at the same time.
This seems like an iPad killer in the bad sense to me. I'm sorry.
Seriously though, the iPad isn't made for the likes of us on Hacker News (though I still kinda want one). It's for people like my father who don't really give a damn what a computer is as long as it's easy to use.
He probably should care that his arm is going to get tired holding his iPad for more than 15-20 minutes. Seriously, I'm failing to picture any long-time user of this device being really, really happy with it.
I'm jazzed about my Windows slate at 3 pounds, and yes, I can browse and post on HN all day with it, even from bed. You don't have to hold it up to use it in any context you can use a hardcover book.
My iPad will weigh half as much and won't require a stylus.
Because no one ever held a book steady in their hand for more than 15-20 minutes without getting tired...
Hell, I've watched whole TV shows on the bus with my iPod Touch. And don't get me started on games. There will be plenty of problems with the device, it's a 1.0, but there will be plenty of people really, really happy with it.
Surely stands or docks will be(or are) available, but I definitely see your point. Judging by the 'lifestyle' photos and videos, the device doesn't look very ergonomic.
I'll stick with my Eeepc; I'd just get Egg McMuffin grease on the touchscreen anyway. And I wouldn't be able to play MAME while I'm standing in line at the DMV.
Stands and docks are available, for a price. My wife wanted one of these, thinking $500 was worth it, but when I started to look into it I found that the $500 model is pretty crippled. You need to be near a WiFi access point if you don't get a 3G model ($130 more) and $30/month service plan, so no 'internet all the time' unless you pay extra. The $500 model also has 16GB of storage, and I have no idea if that's a lot or a little. Since 64GB is available I assume 16GB is not much. So that's another $200. Now you're looking at $830 rather than $500, and you still don't get any accessories.
Vanilla Dock: $30
Keyboard Dock: $70 (looks really flimsy and has a fixed angle)
Case: $40 (need to protect that screen if you're going to carry this thing around)
Camera connection kit: $30 (you need a dock to use this)
VGA adapter: $30 (you need a dock to use this too)
Basic set of accessories: up to $170
Total Price: $1000. Hmm... nice round number, huh?
So much for a $500 revolutionary computing device.
Correct me if I'm wrong – although I don't think I am - but, isn't the point of wifi that you don't need to stay tethered to a router? And the iPad supports 802.11n, so you'll be able to get a decent range with a pretty cheap router. Definitely enough to cover your house and yard.
The $500 model also has 16GB of storage, and I have no idea if that's a lot or a little. Since 64GB is available I assume 16GB is not much.
The size of a movie won't change if you have a 16 or 64GB iPad. And as with everything else, if its enough space or not depends on what you use it for. Personally, 8GB is more than enough space for me, on my iPod touch (and 16GB on my Pre is excessive for what I need). So, I preordered a 16GB iPad.
The availability of a greater size doesn't change the amount of information a smaller size can hold. 16GB is 16GB, regardless of the existence of a 64GB model. It just that there are different sizes that cost different amounts of money.
Total Price: $1000. Hmm... nice round number, huh?
$670-$700 being rounded up to $1000 is a big jump.
I don't have an 802.11n router at home, so I can't say what its range is. My 802.11g does pretty well inside my 3-story house, but drops off a lot into my backyard. Maybe an 802.11n would be better, but that means upgrading my router and possibly other wireless devices.
There's going to be a world of difference between the 3G and non-3G iPads. I can say this from experience having gotten used to my Blackberry with its internet browser (crappy as it is) and my laptop with a Verizon Wireless WWAN card. Having real full internet access wherever you go, without having to search for WiFi access points, changes the way you behave. That's part of the revolution Jobs is talking about with the iPad, but you've got to get one of the 3G models to experience it.
Regarding storage, like I said I really don't know how much I need. I know how much space a movie could take up, which is probably the biggest single thing I would store, but I'm likely to want a few of them. The real question is the applications; how much space do they need? I know that a laptop with 16GB free after installing the OS would be very cramped, but 64GB free is fairly typical (given 80-112GB laptop harddrives.)
The $1000 price point is for the 64GB 3G iPad with a full set of accessories (not the vanilla dock though.) There's no rounding; it adds up to $1000.
There's a dock for that.™ The problem with tablets is you always wind up yearning for the things you get with a laptop and it seems apparent the solution is dongles galore. I guess it's great for the peripheral market.
I think that the iPad and similar devices down the road really could change everything as far as print and multimedia consumption is concerned. But it's going to take a long time (years, perhaps) until these publishers are producing content that's compelling enough that people will actually buy it as opposed to finding similar stuff for free on the web.
My hunch is that these first attempts by magazines will look cool but feel really gimmicky, to the point that they're a bit of a joke. Think cheesy quizzes and games and video content that's been available on the web for weeks (remember, these digital magazines will take time to produce). I wrote about this topic a bit more back in January if you're interested: http://techcrunch.com/2010/01/26/apple-tablet-book-revolutio...
And I'm sure the magazines will be littered with canvas tag-based banner ads that would be much more intrusive than a full page print ad. No ad-blocker plugins on an iPad.
The killer app on the iPad is DRM. Without it, there would be no for-purchase TV shows, movies, books, or magazines as it would be impossible to license the content.
The closed and managed system is not an option for Apple, it is essential to the success of the product.
Right. Much of what the article said the iPad would "transform", I already do on my PC and lots of others do on their laptops or tablets -- things like watching TV, for example. The only thing the iPad does is puts it in a small, portable shell with a slick interface that channels revenue to Apple.
There's a market for that. But I don't see it as being "transformational" in any significant way.
There's a market for that. But I don't see it as being "transformational" in any significant way.
The combination of features, form factor, and App Store, will put all of the above within reach with practically no requirement for being tech savvy. That's "transformational". I can do everything the iPad will do with my 4 year old tablet. But only the truly tech savvy would tinker with it as much as I have to get it to that point, and it's still not as slick as the iPad appears to be. I suspect my 71 year old Dad will be able to pull his out of the box, turn it on, and have an even slicker experience.
Lots of non tech-savvy folks with money will want one.
Will it displace desktops and laptops? Not for people who use them to get work done. Anyone writing a book probably won't use an iPad - nor will someone writing software, or doing accounting/etc. It will, however, one day replace the things "most" people use computers for - consuming media, articles, videos, writing short blogs, etc.
At it's heart - it's a consumption device with some capabilities of creating. The content creation capabilities will simply get stronger with time (UX mockup tools, Keynote/presentation tools, sketching applications, etc). As the tablet/touch-interface market expands and more companies get in the game, things will only get better. More tablets will come, more 3rd party hardware addons will come - creators will be enabled.
Do I wish it ran OSX-Full, instead of iPhone OS? Yes, but while I wish that, I also see the fact that using an OS designed for a touch-based system is superior than a normal OS with touch-based interactivity "bolted on".
Anyone doubting how intuitive and natural a touch-based system is to work with should try handing an iPhone to a two year old. They can figure it out much more quickly than a mouse and keyboard. My poor daughter (my guinea pig) can pick up my iphone, switch screens, find and start her game(s) in seconds. She's still flummoxed by my laptop/touchpad and the little mouse icon on the screen.