“The iPad is not the only worrying sign of Apple’s decline. Let us dissect what went wrong with Apple – the iPhone’s AppStore, the shift of focus away from the Macintosh, and as mentioned, the blighted existence of the iPad.”
The Superior Court of San Mateo issued a warrant to have Gizmodo editor Jason Chen’s home searched. Six of his computers (they’re “the real thing“), including two servers, were seized. Anyone who didn’t see this coming wasn’t paying attention.
Inspired by a brief Twitterexchange with Steve Rubel, I’ve begun thinking about the iPad’s ability to meet the needs of the typical computer user. I mean the folks who spend the vast majority of their computing time
Photos look gorgeous on the iPad but a Mac is recommended for management.* Once photos have been uploaded, there’s no way to move them between albums, events, etc. There’s an accessory that connects a camera directly to the iPad, but I haven’t used it so I don’t know how it works. Additionally, the iPad offers no image editing out of the box. Users are dependent on the efforts of 3rd-party developers.
Word processing is good but could be better. I use Apple’s Pages app (US$9.99) and Bluetooth keyboard successfully, but sharing documents between iPad and Mac is cumbersome.
This leaves video. Yes, YouTube works as do videos purchased from the iTunes Store. That will satisfy most, but not all.
I’ll be exploring this in greater detail on TUAW as a part of the use case series.
In the two weeks that I’ve owned my iPad, I’ve seen a sharp decline in the amount of time I spend with my MacBook Pro. Unless I’m working at a TUAW, I’m using my iPad. The only reason I don’t use the iPad for writing TUAW posts is due to an inconsistency with the CMS. If that weren’t the case, I’d use it then, too.
What I’ve realized is that the iPad has become my go-to computer. Perhaps that’s because I represent the best user case. I’m not a graphics professional or designer. I do a lot of writing, reading and web browsing.
Fortunately for Apple, that’s how the majority of users behave.
I’ll be at Boston’s flagship Apple Store on Boylston Street this Saturday covering the iPad launch. Come over and say, “Hi.” It’d be great to meet you. I’ll be wearing my gray TUAW T-shirt.
The iPad initiative kicks off the University’s Griffin Technology Advantage Program. This new program provides students with the best in technology and collaborative learning tools, ensuring that Seton Hill students will be uniquely suited to whatever careers they choose – even those that have not yet been created.
And that is the end of the game. As we said on TUAW last year, when the iPad was only a rumor, whoever does textbooks right will win the ebook market. Former TUAW blogger Christian Warren:
Do textbooks, and you win. Even without a subsidy it would be worth the investment for most 4-year students, and a no-brainer for grad school. I know during my extended tenure in college that I spent thousands on textbooks, often getting nothing back at trade-in. I had to deal with professors switching [editions] every semester, making finding used books unreliable, unless I wanted to scour eBay and then wait for delivery.
This arrangement will benefit budget-minded students and booksellers alike. Consider the revenue that publishers lose every year when students re-sell used books to campus bookstores. Also, Apple’s got a distribution solution in place that students, faculty and staff already know how to use in iTunes U.
Get publishers to agree to iPad distribution and you’ve got a device that can follow a student from his/her freshman year in high school to graduate school. Why buy a laptop when every student has a device that can be a textbook, reference tool, Internet appliance and whatever else the limitless imaginations of developers can produce?
I understand that developers want to distinguish iPad apps from their equivalent iPod offerings, but I don’t think “HD” is the best method. It’s got a specific definition — high definition video has one or two million pixels per frame — that the iPad doesn’t meet.
It’s logical to assume that one could tack “iPad” or “For iPad” onto their titles, but Apple only recently ruled on how “iPad” may be used. Developers who have been hard at work for weeks had to make a decision before getting their apps in for review. Do you submit an app called, for example, “Plants vs. Zombies iPad” or “Flight Control for iPad” only to have Apple send it back at the last minute?
Additionally, what if a future iPad model is capable of high definition playback? Is your app then “HD Plus?” I think “XL” or something similar would have been better. I know I’m being nit-picky, but I wish “HD” hadn’t been used.
