I'm sorry, I don't need _ANOTHER_ web browsing device in my collection - much less one that fits between my iPhone and a laptop for portability. Okay, so it's better than my iPhone for watching video or looking at pictures. That's nice - but neither of those activities is a big part of my time - even when I'm travelling.
Better e-mail and calendar management? Okay - perhaps that might tempt me. Except I've already got a great setup with my iPhone and my Laptop.
I was hoping for a sense of focus in this device - a purpose that was outside of the bounds of what we already do on a daily basis with our laptops, netbooks and smartphones. Instead, we got a smartphone with size issues.
I can see some application domains that would benefit enormously from the iPad's basic technologies - but I'm very disappointed to see Apple's initial launch being a consumer-arena launch. That basically dooms this device and its potential to irrelevance out the gate. As a news reader/browser, there are lots of great solutions out there already - including the Kindle.
Lastly, what's up with Apple's marketing department? Were they asleep at the wheel when they chose this name? They utterly failed to anticipate the obvious parodies that will come along - and did within hours of the product being announced:
3 comments:
I know this device has its critics, but I don't (yet) have an Iphone, at least until I can get one sans an AT&T contract. For me this will be a family device, and I anticipate being able to carefully toss it over to my kids after I'm done surfing so they can have their fun with it too. I see us taking it with us everywhere we go and having it be THE mobile entertainment device for families with kids. Yeah, not exactly the target market, but it'll do for me quite fine. At least until I get another Macbook Pro. :)
Hmm, agree with your observation on the name....they could've done better. Like iMP (Multi Purpose or Multi Pad). iMP would resonate well with everyone.
On the rest of the device. While certainly not a game changer nor a revolutionary device, it has the distinct advantage of being wide open for developers to build whatever they want and for what the market can use.
The initial set of apps are really no different than what was shipped with the original iPhone...functional...even well done, just not very inspiring. Now look at what the iPhone can do....some of those apps are amazingly useful, and they've taken the iPhone into territory that was not imagined before. The same thing will happen with the iPad. Can you imagine a fully interactive DAW control surface? or how about acting as a drawing tablet that interfaces with a full computer....an auxiliary input device with context sensitive virtual keys or controls.
The real strength of the iPad (no wings) will lie with the developers. It is a basically a blank page currently.....wait a few months for the developers to come on stream....then the full power of this new device will start to show.
And, no, the iPad is not flushable when used.......
SB
I'm just not entirely inspired by the "build it and they will come" attitude that Apple seems to have taken here.
The iPhone rocks because it does so many things so well - it brought together multiple disparate mobile devices in a way that doesn't irritate the user with a dozen awkward interfaces for connectivity.
The iPad doesn't do that, and while I can see it having some interesting potential in several application arenas, I would have liked to see Apple partner with a couple of vendors producing solutions in interesting verticals. As it is, this is another consumer toy that the market can accept or ignore as it sees fit - and there just isn't much about it that makes me say 'I want one for my home'.
Post a Comment