Begin forwarded message:
> Date: January 28, 2010 6:29:51 AM GMT+05:30 > Subject: The Anti-Hype: Why Apple’s iPad Disappoints > Source: Mashable! > Author: Samuel Axon > > > > The iPad is not the transformational device so many Apple enthusiasts were > hoping for. It won’t turn all the content industries upside down, it won’t be > your primary computing device, and it’s not even a bigger, better iPhone. > > Apple CEO Steve Jobs introduced the iPad as a device to fill the gap between > smartphones like the iPhone and high-end laptops like the MacBook and MacBook > Pro. He said there needs to be a middle device, but it needs to be better > than the alternatives at what it does. Netbooks currently fill the void, but > according to Jobs, “netbooks aren’t better at anything.” He and his > colleagues at Apple believe that the iPad is. > > Apple’s website and promotional video call the iPad “magical.” We’re told the > iPad is “the best way to experience the web, email, photos, and videos. Hands > down.” But it’s not — it’s not even close. It’s mighty cool, it’s super > convenient, and it’s very sexy, but it’s not even better than a netbook at > some of those things. > > This isn’t the middle device folks have been waiting for because — and I’m > using Steve Jobs’s own criteria here — it’s not better at anything than any > other device on the market. It’s a step in that direction, but the day hasn’t > come yet. Here are just a few of the ways the iPad isn’t as magical as Apple > claims. > > It’s Not the Best Way to Browse the Web > > > Steve Jobs said it needs to be a better web device than the alternatives. The > Apple website says it’s “the best way to experience the web.” Some variation > of that phrase is repeated several times in the promotional video Apple has > released. But it’s just not true. > > It might be one of the best ways to browse the web on a mobile device, but > laptop and desktop computers — even netbooks — are still better. Most current > websites were designed to be experienced on those devices with a mouse and a > keyboard. Maybe the mouse isn’t necessary, but you don’t have to pop up a > software keyboard to type in URLs on a netbook or laptop. Even if you lug > around the keyboard dock, it will be a tad awkward moving between the keys > and the screen to interact. You’re sacrificing some usability for simplicity > on the iPad. > > Most importantly, the iPad’s browser does not support Adobe Flash, the > foundation of rich media on the web today. Adobe is planning to make it > possible for Flash developers to develop apps, but it won’t work on the web. > > I’ll admit that the decision not to support Flash is a logical one if you > start at the right premises; Flash is responsible for countless reported > crashes on Macs, and Apple can’t control it to ensure quality of experience. > Apple is banking on a transition to HTML5 and CSS 3 for rich web content. > While that transition has already begun, it hasn’t fully happened yet. Until > it does, it’s ridiculous to call this device the best way to experience the > web when one of the most ubiquitous and essential web technologies is not > supported. > > It’s an Unprecedented Win for Closed Computing > > > Many of the software restrictions that drive people mad when they’re using > the iPhone are going to be just as frustratingon the iPad. All the device’s > content — apps, songs, TV shows, movies, books, you name it — can only be > processed through Apple’s iTunes Store. > > You won’t be able to drag and drop or share files with other computers like > you can with your laptop on your home network. You won’t be able to download > a program or music file from the web and play it on the spot. You won’t be > able to use any application that doesn’t meet Apple’s strict approval > guidelines. It’s closed computing at its most extreme. > > Unfortunately we’ve come to expect that from our smartphones. For a larger > device that’s supposed to replace your netbook as a complete portable > computing solution, though, this is almost unprecedented — at least from a > device that’s likely to have a great deal of influence on the market and on > the design of future devices. That’s bad news no matter how you spin it. > > It’s Not Really a Competitive eReader > > > The Kindle owns the eReader landscape right now, and the greatest expectation > for the iPad was that it would bury the Kindle. While the iPad’s reader > interface is indisputably sweet-looking and the list of participating > publishers is promising, there are several ways it just won’t beat the Kindle. > > The most important issue is the price. The Kindle costs $260; so do Barnes & > Noble’s Nook and the comparable Sony Reader. The Kindle even comes bundled > with free 3G network access, though it admittedly can’t do anywhere near as > much with it as the iPad can. > > But if you are considering the iPad primarily as a reader, that price > difference is a big problem. Also a big problem: The lack of an e-ink > display. E-ink doesn’t wash your face in eye-strain-inducing light like the > displays on the iPhone, the iPad, and laptop computers do. It’s meant to be a > soft experience, just like reading a book. Without e-ink, you might not be > able to tolerate spending four straight hours reading Stephen King’s latest > on a regular display, cool IPS tech aside. > > Finally, as impressive as 10 hours of battery life is for a multi-purpose > device like the iPad, the Kindle can run in reading mode for a week without > recharging — longer if Wi-Fi is disabled. Because it’s trying to do > everything, the iPad isn’t the best at anything. > > It’s Not Worth It If You Have a Smartphone and Laptop > > > If the iPad isn’t a good option as a middle device, it ought to at least be > attractive to power users and enthusiasts who already have other devices. > Unfortunately, it’s not. > > It’s not significantly better at anything than either your iPhone or your > MacBook. It can’t be used as your daily workhorse computer on the go, because > just like the iPhone’s OS 3.1.2 the iPad’s OS 3.2 doesn’t multitask. And if > you already have an iPhone, you can do basic information gathering, mapping, > and so on while you’re on the go without spending an additional $29.99 per > month for 3G service. > > Further, your laptop or netbook very likely has a web cam for video > conferencing, and your cell phone probably has a camera (or even video > camera) for capturing images. The iPad has neither. > > Since the interface is graceful and satisfying, you might want to buy it as > an extra device just for the experience, but at between $499 – $829, that’s > not practical for most consumers. > > The Anti-Hype > > The iPad isn’t going to be a phenomenon with either netbook users or power > users. It’s not better than existing devices at anything, and it’s too > expensive for most people to use it as a secondary device. I might have said > something different if the rumors that the iPad would be all about a new push > in the content marketplace were true, but that didn’t happen. Instead, we got > a cool toy. > > [img credit: FSF, Yutaka Tsutano] > Tags: apple, Apple Tablet, ereader, ipad, Kindle, Opinion > > > > > > > Read more… >
