Apple's iPad in all its glory- Would you buy one?

In My Humble Opinion
161

I remember when the Kindle first came out, people were making the exact same arguments. “Why would I want ANOTHER device? I can read E-books on my Palm III!” And it’s true - you could. You can also read them on your iPhone, or on your netbook, or on your desktop PC. But the Kindle is far superior, in little ways - it has a better form factor. It’s always connected to the Kindle store. It has an E-ink display. It’s got great battery life.

In short, it’s not about the features or what it can do, it’s about how it does it, and what the experience is like.

A netbook is nothing like an iPad. If I’m standing in line somewhere and I decide I want to do a little reading, I’m not going to pull out my netbook, boot it up, and cradle it in my arms while trying to use the trackpad and keyboard with one hand so I can do work. But if I’ve got a thin little slate I can slide out of a pouch and just hold like a newspaper, that’s a completely different story.

If I’m running out to a fast-food place for lunch, I’m not going to lug my laptop or netbook along and set it up in the restaraunt just so I can do 15 minutes of web surfing. In fact, unless the restaraunt has Wi-Fi, the only choice I have today is to use an iPhone or similar device, and they’re very limited in that regard. But an iPad? No problem.

Using a laptop on a flight is becoming increasingly difficult. If the passenger in front of you leans back, you often can’t even put your laptop on the little table. It’s hard to remove and put back in its case, and the battery won’t last for a long flight. But an iPad? It’s a traveler’s dream machine. You can recline and read or play games or watch a movie in high-definition, and you can do it comfortably. If you need to put the thing down for a minute, you can slide it into the seatback pouch. Business travelers could buy this thing in droves.

You can’t use a netbook while lying on your back. Not easily. But you can certainly hold an iPad up and read it. That makes it a completely different experience for using while you’re getting ready to go to sleep.

Do not underestimate the cumulative value of things like speed of access to applications (no bootup), tactile feel, UI experience, weight (the iPad weighs a third of what a typical netbook weighs), ‘coolness’ factor, etc.

When I studied product design, I learned about the Kano model. The Kano model teaches that there are three basic categories of features in a product: the ‘must haves’, the ‘nice to haves’, and the ‘delighters’. If you don’t have the must-haves, your product is dead. If all you’ve got is must-haves, you’ve got a generic product that won’t spark any excitement. The ‘nice-to-haves’ are the features you see touted in advertising blurbs.

But the thing that separates the also-rans from the great products are the delighters. Products filled with delighters are the ones that inspire rabid fans and sell for premiums that make their producers lots of profits.

Apple excels at delighters. On paper, there is very little difference between an iPhone and Windows Mobile devices and Android devices. They all have the must-haves, and Windows Mobile even has a lot of nice-to-haves that are better than the iPhone. Call quality is only so-so on the iPhone. The camera is only average. It’s bigger than the competition. It doesn’t have a user replaceable battery. It’s locked to one provider. I could build a good case for why the iPhone should have failed in the market.

But it didn’t - it killed the market. And it was all about the delighters. Just holding it and playing around with it, you could tell that this was a different kind of device, something that was very compelling to have and use.

The iPad may or may not be like that. One thing you also learn from the Kano model is that delighters eventually become nice-to-haves, and nice-to-haves eventually become must-haves. You can’t play in the mobile phone space any more without a nice color touchscreen, for example. What was once a delighter is now a must-have. It remains to be seen if the perception of the iPad will be that it’s a delightful device, or whether the iPhone has already matured the market enough that people won’t get excited by it when they use it. I suspect they will.

162

Do you work for Apple for something?

Anyway, if I’m standing in line somewhere, I’ll be using my iPhone–not lugging a 10" tablet around (you can’t slip that into your coat). And if I were in the market for an e-book reader (which I’m not, mostly), I’d get a Kindle.

In fact, it’s ironic that the arguments you put forth for the Kindle vs the Palm also apply to the Kindle vs the iPad.

Better form factor? Check. (smaller, lighter, buttons)
Always connected to the Kindle store? Check. (iPad isn’t unless you get the 3G model with dataplan, which Kindle also doesn’t require you pay for).
E-ink display? Check.
Great battery life? Check.

Kindle + iPhone more practical and useful than the iPad. But seeing as I don’t care about reading books, iPhone + Laptop is also more practical and useful than the iPad (and if I really did want to read a book for whatever reason, the iPhone Kindle app is good enough).

163

Why? Just why? The arguments on both sides of this are interesting. Why turn it into a personality conflict when it doesn’t have to be?

People can like a product without being a fanboy or owning part of the company.

Yes, there are people who like what the iPad looks like. Some of them have never even owned an Apple product. Shocking.

In addition there are people who enjoy the Nintendo Wii without being a causal gamer, a Mario fanboy, or even a Nintendo stockholder.
You can like Avatar without being a little girl who loved Titanic.
And most surprisingly there are people who like Microsoft 2007 who have never even seen Bill Gates naked!

This is nothing personal, I just hate when that sort of comment gets thrown out when people are having pretty interesting discussions. That sort of comment is bound to make anyone defensive.

164

I would like to retract that one comment–it was uncalled for. I did intend for it to be more tongue-in-cheek than a literal question, just to be clear.

I was just taken back by how seemingly devoted someone can be to a device to which they have not tried. I have no problem with anyone who’s interested in the device–that’s fine. But when a post reads an ad campaign, it’s hard not to think there’s some level of Steve Jobs distortion field at work here.

165

Bingo!

I don’t see the iPad being presented as a general-purpose computer/tablet, so criticism of for not being that is a waste of time. It IS a multi-purpose device - perhaps Steve Job’s implementation of Jef Raskin’s vision.

For interesting takes on this device, I recommend Farhad Manjoo on Slate and John Gruber on Daring Fireball.

166

Only if you ignore Steve Jobs’ continued inference through comparison that the iPad is a Netbook replacement.

167

For some historical perspective,here is the first thread on the SDMB about the iPhone.

People seemed much more excited about that. If the overall level of excitement in the two threads is any indication, the iPad won’t do as well.

168

I really wanted to want this, because I’m due to buy myself a nice little gadget. But I’ll be waiting. No SD slot? No USB jacks? No Flash? No multitasking? Somebody will make an Android or Linux based tablet that isn’t confined to Apple’s aquarium sooner or later, and probably sooner. For all Jobs’ netbook bashing, the only things the iPad has over them that I can see is better HD video playback and a bit nicer form factor for certain specific applications (reading in bed, etc - however, it’s significantly worse for other applications, like touch-typing email). And the list of things netbooks have over the iPad is longer than my arm, starting with running a real OS (XP, 7, Ubuntu, or even OS X if you don’t mind a little work, take your pick) and compatibility with standard accessories via USB, and running off over the horizon from there.

I mean, seriously, I can’t transfer files onto this thing with a thumb drive or SD card. WTF?

169

Likes:
Overall design - clean and simple
Dimensions - not too big, not too small, not too heavy either… just right
Multi-touch - with the screen this size it’s even better
Will support most iPhone apps and create a new market for larger and more powerful apps
Video quality isn’t perfect but is good enough for me

Dislikes:
The name is stupid and will often get confuzed with the iPod (Steve even called it an iPod in his presentation) iTab or iTablet could have worked
Does not support Flash in the browser (but, this may be added later, I don’t know)
Does not have a USB port or SD card slot for added memory (of course they want you to just upgrade if you want more memory as SD/thumb memory is practically given away nowadays)
No onboard camera - I think Apple would be wise to create an (innovative) little HD camera which can be plugged in to the iPad, but also allow charging at the same time–a splitter maybe (maybe this exists?) Really, there can be a host of other possible items that could be plugged into this machine…

My first impression of this device was ‘what’s new’? But after I watched the 1 hour presentation I began to see the direction in which this will go in. Apple like to create things which become ‘the norm’, such as the iPod for portable MP3 players and I think the iPad will soon dominate the e-book reader market and possibly the tablet market.

Will I buy one? Likely in the near future. I see some great potential for the 3rd party apps here–that’s really a big decider for me. To be honest, the only reason I have not purchased an iPod Touch is because of it’s small dimensions and the fact is was basically an iPhone, which I’d had before. The iPad iis basically what the iPod Touch should have been, and it’s nice seeing they got it right this time.

170

Thanks for that! I wish I had been posting then to see what idiot things I might have said. In two years when the iTablet comes out we’ll see!

People seemed just as skeptical back then! They turned out to be right, too. Tied to ATT(Cingular)? Sucks. Closed system? Pretty much.

Some people are pretty consistent.
Then:

Now:

Then:

Now:

Then:

Now:

Mangeout appears to have been won over (a little bit).
Then:

Now:

And my favorite: MacTech. He is FINALLY getting exactly what he asked for. I hope he posts in here, because it is kind of cool that this is exactly what he wanted.
Then:

171

I’ll admit when I’m wrong, and seeing as I own an iPhone, I think it’s pretty clear which side of the fence I land on.

That aside, it doesn’t invalide current opinion.

172

Perhaps the marketing department will eventually get it right and release one with “Don’t Panic” inscribed in large, friendly letters on the front.

173

That was interesting (and a bit sorta almost creepy - I like to think I’m fairly self consistent over time, but I always hope nobody will test me on it).

I was in the market for a smartphone at the tail end of last year (when I accidentally dropped my well-worn and much-loved Treo 650 down a stairwell) - I considered the iPhone, but still found it too expensive, wasn’t sure Android would have the apps I wanted (and handsets were still a bit pricey).

I ended up plumping for the Treo Pro - a choice that I’m still not at all sure was the right one (Windows Mobile, which is OK-ish, but the nonstandard square screen means it won’t run most applications on the market)

I think the iPhone is nice and if money was no object, I might have one.

But the iPad? I’m not seeing the point of it (for me) and it just seems to have a few serious flaws - how can it be the best possible web experience if it doesn’t support Flash? (I guess the argument could be made that none of the best websites use Flash, ever, but that would be a pretty ridiculous thing to say).

I wouldn’t buy one if I had the money sitting there, and no idea what to spend it on.

174

Exactly! Stan Schroeder of Mashable.com hit the nail on the head when he said…

And then with regard to the lack of Flash, USB connections and multi-tasking, Charlie Sorrell of Wired magazine had this to say:

[bolding mine]

Quotes are from CNN’s Tech website here and here.

175

People (generally those that don’t see the lack of Flash as a shortcoming) seem to be equating Flash with online streamed video, when in fact, that’s only one thing that flash is used for on the web. What about games and cartoons? Are those too trivial for Apple People?

Or could it just be more profitable to sell people several less powerful devices instead of one that does everything?

176

It may work for some people as a portable browser/reader, and for that I can see the point of having GSM etc in it. As for me, I’m lugging around a macbook anyway and I do a lot more with it than just browsing, so I wouldn’t get it for that. It may be a nice thing to have in the living room so you can browse on the couch, but I only need Wifi for that.

I don’t think the last word on ebooks’s been said, so this device may become the defacto standard, like the original ipod stole away much of the market from other earlier mp3 players, but that really depends more on the market for the content than anything else; I don’t even think the non-e-paper screen will matter all that much - in fact having a standard laptop screen makes it practical to use the device for other media applications (itunes video, anyone?). If apple can get enough publishers on board and keep the price on content down I’m sure they can make a decent dent in the market.

My big objection is the OS, not so much because it’s limited; this device is clearly meant to be limited, but because it means apple will have all the power to decide what I can run on the thing. For me, it’s an obvious device to use for controlling other machines; I’d like something like this to control a media center, for example; the multi-touch interface also has great potential for music production interfaces (much more flexible and cheaper than most hardware interfaces), but if the iphone appstore is anything to go by, any software that’s user-extensible would be blocked. That right there is a deal killer for me. I might just accept that sort of thing on a phone (though it’s the main reason I don’t own an iphone), but no way would I accept it one a machine like this.

177

I’m just hopping into this thread halfway, but…

…You guys are shitting me, right? They wouldn’t actually produce a web-surfing tablet that doesn’t support any website that uses Flash, would they? I mean, that’s got to eliminate 25% of the web.

And it doesn’t multitask AT ALL?

Just to ask a stupid question; what’s this thing for? I mean, it looks really cool, but I don’t understand why I’d want one. The thing about the iPod was that it played music, and did it way, way better than any other Mp3 player. The iPhone combined a wide variety of functions into a single phone-sized device. I don’t understand what the iPad does that’s

  1. Unique, or
  2. Better than other devices.

For my birthday this year, I want an iPhone. I don’t know why I would want an iPad.

I’ve no doubt they’ll make some money off it; there’s already news stories running about people literally saying - no joke - “I will buy anything Apple makes, I don’t even need to see it first.” But if this ends up flopping and allowing someone else to vault ahead in mobile computing, it won’t be the first time a tech coimpany’s hubris has allowed them to lose the #1 spot coughPlasyStation3cough.

Sam Stone may be right; the form and UI might make the device. But I have a feeling Apple might have missed an opportunity to jump WAY ahead of the competition. As much as you might hate Flash, it’s going to drive people absolutely insane to start surfing on their iPad and find out there’s a gigantic ton of Web content they simply cannot use or see. They can say a USB hookup or SD memory slot don’t matter, but it’ll be a frustration to a lot of people.

178

I don’t know. One device that does everything would undoubtedly cost a great deal more, so fewer people would be able to own them.

Take the iPhone/iPod touch situation, for example. Apple knew that there would be lots of people who would want the iPhone’s non-phone functionality but without the iPhone’s greater expense and AT&T contract. So they offered the iPod touch to serve that market and it’s been very, very popular even though it lacks the iPhone’s camera, GPS, or telephonic capability. So there you have an additional and virtually identical but less powerful product on the market that people have been nonetheless been delighted to have access to.

The iPod touch originally came in for much of the same criticism about lack of features that is now being leveled at the iPad. It didn’t have a camera, it didn’t have GPS, it didn’t have Flash or multi-tasking, etc. But it put lots of cool features into a cool device that lots of people would want to buy anyway.

And that’s pretty much what Apple is doing now with the iPad. It isn’t intended to be a tablet-sized, do-everything computer, and it isn’t intended to be a telephone or camera. It is meant primarily to be a casual porthole to the internet that you can carry from room to room and hold on your lap while you sit on the couch or lie in bed and surf the internet, check your e-mail, read a book, watch a movie or whatever, and it looks as if it does all those things very well.

So in other words, no. I have no problem with a company that produces a multiplity of items that offer different advantages or drawbacks and which allow me to choose which one[s] I want based on their functionallity and how I’m most likely to use them.

I also have no problem with that company acheiving additional profitability by doing so. Profitability is good. It achieves economies of scale that make products more affordable, and it provides a good living for tens or hundreds of thousands of employees and their families, which allows them in turn to pay for houses and cars and food and entertainment, all of which is good for the economy and the nation’s tax base as well.

So you see, more profitability is a good thing.

Many Regards,

Gordon Gek…uh, Starving Artist.

179

Hopefully, in 6-12 months, we’ll see an A4 / letter-sized Windows 7 version with a full 720p or 1080p screen.

Anyway, it’s just struck me: the form factor is straight off Star Trek and other assorted sci-fi shows.

180

Can somebody explain to me how the iPad is better than this?

HP TouchSmart tm2t series which costs at the HP store $949. Yes it is heavier so it won’t replace an e-book reader probably, but how soon before someone comes out with a lighter more compact version of this?