Everyone else has an opinion so after some consideration here’s mine.
What is it?
- It’s not a communications device: no phone calls, no video calls.
- It’s not a laptop alternative: it doesn’t have the power to run standard applications.
- It’s not a portable device: it’s too big for pockets and you need to be seated to use it
- It’s not an eReader: it has a backlit display not a readable eInk display.
- It’s not a home media centre: the screen is too small and it has too little storage.
- It’s not a portable mediaplayer: it’s too big for everyday use.
- It’s not an education device: schools struggle to buy textbooks costing £20 each.
- It’s not a business device: no MS Office means no business for most of the world.
- It’s not a gaming device: too underpowered for console, too big for schoolbag.
Despite the apparently adverse comments I think this is the most interesting device to arrive in years. It’s design and the technology behind are to be admired but after the initial sales rush caused by the media hype and fanboys, it’s unclear what will happen.
The iphone gained almost immediate traction with the general public because competing products were so very poor. Initial sales volume, combined with a creative development community created a virtuous circle dragging both consumers and developers into the Apple fold.
This time the Ipad is competing with products from two sectors (phone and laptops) and doesn’t seem to offer clear advantages over either. Apple and it’s development community will have to begin to define the Ipad as something different and remove the feeling that it’s is defined by what it’s not.
Can the Ipad define itself as a new class of device or will it become another in the long line failed of tablets? I don’t know but given Apple’s recent history it would be hard to bet against them.
