History and the iPad

The debut of the iPad held very few surprises. The rumors from the past few months were relatively accurate, and perhaps that lack of surprise is why the announcement lacked the luster of previous years. Then again, is this reaction to an Apple debut that different?

The response in the tech community and among those I have spoken to since the iPad’s announcement has been rather negative. A lot of the concerns are similar: the closed nature of the system, the inability to render Flash, and the lack of multi-tasking (among others). None of those things really seem to be major problems to me, and they are no different than the “problems” faced by the iPhone. That device seems to do fairly well.

Speaking of the iPhone, does anyone remember what people were saying when it debuted several years ago?

The Past

Richard Sprague (Microsoft):

So please mark this post and come back in two years to see the results of my prediction: I predict they will not sell anywhere near the 10M Jobs predicts for 2008. Okay, it’s possible there are enough Apple religious people to buy a lot of them at first, but even the most diehard Mac fans who buy one of these will secretly carry two phones. One to prove how loyal and “cool” they are, and the other to actually make and receive calls.

There were 13.7 million iPhones sold in 2008 alone. And edit the phone part and this sounds identical to the comments being made about the iPad right now.

Steve Ballmer (CEO, Microsoft):

There’s no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance.

Ed Corrigan (CEO, Palm):

We’ve learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone. PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not going to just walk in.

Matthew Lynn (Bloomberg):

The iPhone is nothing more than a luxury bauble that will appeal to a few gadget freaks. In terms of its impact on the industry, the iPhone is less relevant… Apple is unlikely to make much of an impact on this market… Apple will sell a few to its fans, but the iPhone won’t make a long-term mark on the industry.

I compiled the above quotes from a sampling of this MacDailyNews article. It provides just a sampling of what was said before the iPhone becoming the premier cellular device and revolutionizing the industry. Was the first iPhone a little rough around the edges? Sure. But Apple led the way in moving cell phones forward dramatically, by making their own top-notch product and basically forcing other companies to try to keep pace.

Again, is any of this sounding familiar? I am not sure we want to bet against a company who revolutionized an industry 3 years ago. The same level of skepticism surrounded the iPhone. The above is just a small sample of how it got crushed when Jobs first announced it. Have we not learned anything?

Among the crowds crying to anyone who will listen about everything they thought the iPad should be, there are a few people who are aware that we may be at the start of another revolution. They suggest that we may need to “think different” about the iPad.

The Future

Steven Frank (Panic):

Apple is calling the iPad a “third category” between phones and laptops. I am increasingly convinced that this is just to make it palatable to you while everything shifts to New World ideology over the next 10-20 years.

And later:

The iPad as a particular device is not necessarily the future of computing. But as an ideology, I think it just might be.

This article is probably the best written about the subject of the iPad to this point. Frank captures what Apple is going after, and why we should be paying attention. The entire article is brilliant, and I highly recommend reading it in its entirety.

Fraser Speirs (Connected Flow):

For years we’ve all held to the belief that computing had to be made simpler for the ‘average person’. I find it difficult to come to any conclusion other than that we have totally failed in this effort. Secretly, I suspect, we technologists quite liked the idea that Normals would be dependent on us for our technological shamanism.

Speirs wanders along the same lines as the Frank article. Another great insight into the possible goal in mind behind the creation of the iPad. The iPad, with its controlled experience and simple interface, could make complex tasks much easier for the average user. That is an extension of what Mac OSX has been doing for years.

Andy Ihnatko (Chicago Sun-Times):

Is it better to have a device that is loaded with bullet-pointable features?

Or is it better to have a device that has a shorter list of specs … but which does everything right?

That’s not a loaded question. It’s the key difference between the Android and iPhone operating systems. It’ll also define the difference between a netbook and an iPad. The former looks great on paper. The Apple product looks great when you’re actually trying one out firsthand.

That debate is the heart of the matter. Apple is trying to simplify the mobile computing experience down to its core, and perfect those essential features. The iPhone spawned dozens of copycats that can mimic the looks, but not the experience. Design is more than a layer of gloss. Apple’s products look great, but the reason people enjoy them is because the experience of using them, both in terms of simplicity and reliability, is better than the competition. A laundry-list of features that the iPad does not have is irrelevant, because the idea is giving users what they need and nothing more.

Closing Thoughts

Back to the iPad—the hardware is great. The iWork and Mail software is impressive, but I am not a fan of the scaled iPhone apps or the iPad’s home screen. I love the idea of reading PDFs on it, and I think I understand Apple’s stance on the iPad standing between the iPhone and laptop computers in a third space (for now, as Steven Frank notes). But to judge a product before I have used it, and 60 days before its premium version will be available to the general public, seems a little premature. The truth is we are not going to know if the iPad is a success until later. Just like the iPhone. And the iPod. And the Mac.

I do understand the concern from developers about the iPad. It is for consumption. But, that is what a gigantic percentage of users are utilizing their computers for anyway. I think this also fits into the aforementioned third space, because the iPad can be used as a complementary computer. In this sense, the iPad can function as a primary machine for basic users, while also holding the ability to be a secondary device for power users. That is amazing potential. It remains to be seen if the software can live up to the incredible hardware and deliver on said potential, but I hope that the above review of recent history shed some light on my optimism.

I love Apple products not because they are from Apple, but because they are the best. If another company created a computing experience that was superior, I would love their products too. It is that commitment to being the best that leads me to believe there will be a lot of people eating their words in a few years (just like with the iPhone). But for now, we as the general public and the tech community do all that we can do.

We wait.

Update: An article by Greg Knauss that is another great read on the subject.