I couldn’t resist getting into the joke about the Apple iPad with the post title–I can see some eyes rolling. I get excited about Apple product announcements because Steve Jobs is an amazing presenter. I enjoy taking sips of the Apple Kool-aid that brainwashes me into wanting an Apple product even if I don’t need it. Thankfully, I have Jenni to talk about it afterward, geek out for a while, and come back to Earth realizing that it’s another fancy toy to learn about, and not something I have a need for.
The hype around the iPad was incredible. All the way through January, the web was chattering about when the announcement would come and what the device would be like. Not surprisingly, with the extreme level of hype, I was underwhelmed when the iPad was officially announced.
Several blogs and web sites I frequent put in their two cents about the iPad and its implications. The editor at Lifehacker.com discouraged people from buying the iPad because Apple has too much power in controlling what software can be installed. I hadn’t thought about the issue too much, but I knew of the Google Voice debacle where Apple rejected the app because it competed with one of iPhone’s core functions.
Later, I ran across a different perspective, which got me thinking more about Apple’s closed system with the App Store. I talked it over with Jenni during dinner and drew similarities between a closed system and marriage: you lose a few freedoms but also gain a few freedoms.
I think the tinkerer and computer enthusiast in me was underwhelmed with the iPad because it did not offer USB ports, camera, and the ability to multitask third-party applications. As a poweruser, I’m accustomed to doing multiple things at once on a computer and losing that freedom on an iPad seems harsh.
However, Apple doesn’t target the powerusers, but the everyday user. And as the iPhone clearly showed, the everyday user does not need multitasking. In an age of
The iPad has the potential to bring computing to people who have been afraid or felt ill-equipped to use computers. Some of the vocal iPad critics are powerusers who take on the ideology of the house of Slytherin. They oppose the “dumbing down” to bring masses in. They believe quality or integrity will suffer like a crappy house will bring the neighborhood value down. By making the tools of their trade accessible to any person, they feel their trade has become less valuable because now anyone do it.
Some of those fears are stemmed from selfishness. I find that making tools accessible to be a huge boon. I draw similarities to how blogging and the internet has given people chances to become known writers that otherwise may never have been known.
Tools to make things simpler doesn’t negate the need for experts still. Just making desktop publishing software easier doesn’t mean everyone is now a great designer. But it gives an opportunity for people who normally are unable to be designers to excel.
Coming back to freedoms, using the iPad, iPod touch, or iPhone does require the user to give up the ability to legitimately install unauthorized applications. However, what the user gets in return, is a pretty stable device because the software has gone through approvals. You are, in fact, married to Apple’s ideology and system with all its benefits and flaws.
Ultimately, what makes me believe that the iPad will be successful is that it shifts computers from being a complex device with a steep learning curve into an appliance that serves its purpose well and can be used with little training. It focuses on simplifying using the web, watching movies, reading e-books, and listening to music with its multitouch interface. While it won’t be able to run photoshop or video games that I play, it may well be a great mobile internet device for grandma and parents, and get them onto facebook, see photos of their family, and even simplify their e-mail experience. That’s something to get excited about, even if it sounds funny that we’re all changing over to pads.
4 replies on “Changing to Pads”
Technically the iPhone does use multitasking. Safari, iPod, Mail and Phone are all multitasked regularly — and I’d argue that there is a clear need for that. I think it’s terribly lame that Apple doesn’t allow for native backgrounding of all apps out of the box. It forces people to jailbreak their phones to install Backgrounder and risk losing warranties if they can’t flash back to the original firmware. While I can appreciate some of the reasons why Apple dumbs down their products to the masses, I think there should be advanced settings to allow people to use these expensive pieces of hardware more intelligently. With that said, I love my iPhone and it is the most useful mobile device I’ve ever used. That doesn’t mean that can’t make it better 😉
It’s the balance between stability and flexibility. Apple could allow multitasking for all apps, but they risk the iPhone being unstable. So they protect the system with strict limits. Their mantra is tight control of their products, which is a big deterrent for those of us who know what we’re doing and not worried about messing up. Being said, I don’t own an iPhone, but I’m sure the lack of multitasking would be annoying if I had one.
I understand the thoughts on the balance of having a snappy, stable device versus a slower, bogged-down device. Why does it have to be one or the other? Giving people the flexibility to choose is what would make it a stronger device. If they default the iPhone to not have multitasking of 3rd party apps and bury the option to enable it deep in the settings, then 75% of iPhone users will have that stable, snappy device Apple shoots for because they don’t know how to even check their settings. However, for the remainder of users, enabling that — possibly with the expense of having a slower overall experience — will allow for a better overall experience. You say “[Apple] risks the iPhone being unstable,” but shouldn’t I get to make that risk? It’s like they treat their users as children and Daddy Apple knows best. After jailbreaking my phone, I background apps very often and it saves a lot of time in the end. And I don’t have a noticeably slower or unstable phone as a result. Steve Jobs says Adobe is “lazy”. Perhaps a look in the mirror would be appropriate? I mean, come on, it took two years to give their device cut-and-paste. Otherwise, yes, their mobile OS is great. It’s just unfortunate that they insist on handicapping it as though it was a favor to their users.
The copy and paste functionality is a wild herring for the iPhone. I can’t believe they didn’t include that.
Apple could allow the users to accept the risk of a less stable platform, but Apple is very intent on keeping their brand image of “it just works.” It’s quite selfish, but it is effective.
When you say they handicap it for their users, I think one thing to keep in mind that they may consider a majority of their users don’t need the multitasking to the level you do.
They will likely enable multitasking in the future to stay competitive, or the hardware can handle it better.
Apple’s method has never quite been about flexibility. They give a great experience, if you do it their way, but don’t really give you provisions if you strike it out on your own.