In the single most underwhelming product announcement in either of Steve Jobs’ tenure at Apple, the company today announced its iPad tablet computer. Available in April 2010 and ranging in price from US$400 for 16GB of flash storage to US$699 for 64GB (3G wireless networking costs an additional US$130), the iPad is literally a 9.7-inch, 1024x768 iPod Touch.
Jobs declared that Apple had negotiated a “breakthrough” US$30 per month unlimited data plan deal with AT&T. That’d be the same AT&T that already can’t support the network demands of iPhone users. And breakthrough? Well, not so much; I had an unlimited mobile data plan from Qwest for US$25 per month several years ago, on a network with actual capacity.
Existing iPhone/iTouch software will work on the new device in either a pixel-for-pixel rendering in the center of the display, or in what has to be an extremely ugly “pixel double” full-screen mode. How many developers will be willing to make iPad-specific versions of their iPhone software? If the process is the least bit resource-intensive, my bet is not many. Before dismissing this as curmudgeonly carping, remember that Apple solely—and heavy-handedly—controls the only distribution channel and that Apple has set the price ceiling for serious apps at US$10.
Forget about using the iPad while standing up. The iPad’s keyboard is the same software keyboard used in the iPhone/iTouch, taking up half the screen when deployed. While seemingly almost useable while sitting (an optional dock with physical keyboard will be available), how fast can you type with one hand? Bet good money that somebody right now, in his basement, is developing the iBib—some sort of strap contraption that lets you suspend the iPad from around your neck in order to type with both hands while standing or walking around.
Other complaints: The same walled garden ecosystem as the iPhone/iTouch, no camera(s), no Flash support in the browser, no multitasking, limited video codec support, no DisplayPort, and a weird aspect ratio (it appears to be close to 4:3). Most of these can be fixed.
The one feature of the iPad that I find extremely interesting is the processor: a 1GHz Apple A4, high-performance, low-power system-on-a-chip. Apple’s now in the chip design business and it’s only a matter of time until this approach migrates up (or down, depending on your perspective) the company’s mobile product line.
Update: Thursday, 28 January 2010, 07:39AM CST: After mulling on my intense subliminal distaste for the iPad, I think I now understand it: The device is targeted solely at consuming media, not creating it. (Also added material to third graf about Apple’s ham-fisted control of only distribution channel and setting price ceiling for serious apps at US$10.)
Nah, the iPod introduction was more underwhelming. I remember visiting a friend at Apple who told me the much hyped, mysterious, soon-to-be announced product was, ta da, an mp3 player. That’s it? The world changing product was just another mp3 player? I’m pretty sure that was close to the same reaction of every tech savvy observer at the time.
I’m a little uncomfortable with the walled garden ecosystem (except for the inevitable jail breaking that systems of this complexity always seem to have) but it is way too early to dismiss anything this shiny that has such a wealth of apps and already primed app creators. My bet is that there are many desktop and laptop owners out there who will find this product closer to what they want to use.