MacPrices.net

Will The iPad Be A Laptop-Challenging Game-Changer Or Remain A Niche Player?

Wednesday, April 7, 2010

by Charles W. Moore

Now that the iPad is finally here (or there in my case, since we Canadians won’t have it for another three weeks or so) it will take some time before it’s ultimate significance and impact on the portable computing world can be determined. Indeed, after nearly half a decade on the portable scene, the netbook’s place in the portable computing spectrum is not yet clearly defined.

I have to say, with the qualification that I have yet to lay hands on one, but based on careful perusal of many reviews by cheerleading iPad enthusiasts, disdainful skeptics, and everything in between, that I remain unenticed and underwhelmed by the iPad concept.

Not necessarily by the device itself, which is typically Apple classy and cool, and I’ll accept without reservation that as many have observed the iPad’s physical form just feels good -- even “sensual” and “tactile,” albeit perhaps a tad heavy for a handheld device.

It is in the areas of functionality and philosophical concept that I have serious misgivings. That of course is predicated on how I regard and use computers -- almost exclusively as work tools and not so much for pleasure or entertainment. I do a tremendous amount of reading on-screen, but it’s not a modality that appeals to me as enjoyable, and while I’m sure the iPad as a book-reader beats a laptop computer, a smartphone, or even most or all dedicated ebook reading devices, the essential concept of relaxing with a hard, cold, not exactly featherweight electronic gadget rather than a real, honest paper and ink hard copy book or magazine is not my cup of tea.

That’s why I still subscribe to four hard-copy magazines, a daily newspaper, and have bookshelves (and book piles) all over the house, which are what I read for enjoyment. No hard plastic, metal, or glass surface will ever be able to match or even come close to the tactile satisfaction of holding paper media in hand, IMHO. I don’t doubt that I will most likely be obliged to eventually succumb to the e-publishing onslaught due to lack of continued access to traditional content media, but that day has not arrived yet.

Consequently, the iBook’s acknowledged prowess as an eBook reader is not much of an enticement for me. I’m not an electronic gamer either, and an iPod and iTunes on my laptops are more than adequate as a digital jukebox, so iPad as a delivery device for those things isn’t much of a draw either.

That leaves work, image editing, content creation, Web access, and communication, none of which the iPad does as well as a laptop computer or even a cheap netbook. Its deficiencies are manifold, the most egregious being its lack of a real keyboard and pointing device support, the absence of even one USB port, and non-support of multitasking, and inability to drive printers. Even with the optional external keyboard and dock, reviewers have noted the obvious awkwardness of having to reach for the display surface for pointing, clicking, and dragging tasks.

The rumored imminent iPhone OS 4 may address the multitasking issue with an iPadian riff on the Exposé feature from the Mac OS, but the real issue is that the iPad is limited to the tightly locked-down iPhone app. world as opposed to real Mac OS X. iPad apps. just can’t compete with the freedom and versatility of the OS X ecosystem.

LiveScience's Ker Than and Robert Roy Britt contend that whether the iPad is worth buying boils down to how much you’re willing to pay for a toy, going on to critique its manifold deficiencies: it’s heavy, slippery, the screen has too much glare, forget about reading in the sun, fingerprints are annoying, there’s no multitasking, a limited browser (with no Flash support), the virtual keyboard stinks, no USB port, iPhone-only apps look horrible, the price is just too high, and it doesn’t replace anything.

PC World’s Jason Cross points out that compared with an iPad, a PC netbook gives you access to any browser you choose with full support for Flash, Silverlight the ability to see the whole Web, whereas the iPad offers no local storage, so moving documents around is a real pain, obliging you to e-mail them to yourself, open them from the Mail program or from your favorite Web mail client, then e-mail them back when you’re done making taking lengthy notes or writing long papers or articles an onerous chore, and Jason says as much as he dislikes most netbook keyboards, they’re infinitely more usable than the iPad’s on-screen keyboard sop if your primary need is a system for work, the netbook’s superiority is indisputable.

Or as VentureBeat's Anthony Ha, noted, yes, you can work on the iPad -- but why would you?, observing that the ebook reading experience on the iPad, while imperfect, is in his estimation some ways superior to a physical book, but writing, on the other hand, is slightly worse than a normal computer in almost every respect, and he
can’t think of any situation where he’d want to work on the iPad when it would always be easier to whip out his laptop.

Even one of the most effusive iPad enthusiasts in the early goingThe Chicago Sun-Times' Andy Ihnatko, concedes that the iPad is no replacement for his notebook, but rather fills another gap that's existed for quite some time.

Which illustrates why I’m optimistic that the conventional laptop computer, my preferred computing form factor, is in no danger of being displaced, or even wounded in the marketplace significantly, by the iPad.

As a Trefis report on the potential for iPad cannibalization of MacBook sales this week observed, “For more serious content creators like writers, programmers and graphic designers, the iPad is not yet a sufficient substitute for a Mac notebook,” although they also observe that “the mix of content consumers versus content creators, as well as the price differential between the iPad and Macs, will be important determinants of whether or not the iPad will meaningfully cannibalize Mac notebook sales.” Trefis predicts Apple will sell 8.5 million Mac notebooks in 2010, which represents 5.4% market share in the global notebook PC market.

Those are practical considerations, but there is also the philosophical factor. Along with its functional shortcomings compared with a laptop, it seems that a fair few of us bridle at the iPhone-esque, tightly controlled and locked-down iPad concept.

SF author Cory Doctorow posted an eloquent Jeremiad on Boing Boing about why he’s “completely uninterested in buying an iPad. Doctorow acknowledges that clearly much thoughtfulness and cleverness went into the design, but perceives “a palpable contempt for the owner.”

‘If you can’t open it, you don’t own it. Screws not glue,” says Doctorow, noting that the original Apple ][+ came with schematics for the circuit boards, and birthed a generation of hardware and software hackers who upended the world for the better. He doesn’t want his universe of apps “constrained to the stuff that the Cupertino Politburo decides to allow for its platform.”

Me neither.

Similarly, Seeking Alpha’s Jeff Jarvis also contends that the iPad is retrograde — an attempt to turn us back into a passive audience again, which he thinks explains why media companies and advertisers are embracing it so fervently in the hope that it will usher in a return to their good old days when the audience just consumed, but didn’t create, and they functioned as gatekeepers who controlled our media experience and business models on a take it or leave it basis.

“The iPad is purposely handicapped,” says Jarvis, but it doesn’t need to be,” citing the German WePad that comes with USB ports, a camera, multitasking, and the more open Android operating system and marketplace.

Yet another iPad contrarian is Aaron Gell, president of mediaelites.com, who, writing in the Huffington Post, says he hates the iPad and all that it stands for, and desperately hopes it goes the way of the Newton, because it represents the final and most convincing piece of evidence yet of what he -- a committed Mac fan who says he wouldn’t buy a PC if it offered to rub his feet — perceives as an agenda to trap us all in iTunes’ walled garden forever, arguing that the iPad isn’t hackable, it’s not democratic but rather a toy for “dummies and cultural Pringles-eaters who just want to sit back and take in stuff, not for creators and innovators who want to change the world.”

Well, I’m not terribly ambitious or optimistic about changing the world, but I do like to be able to change my own batteries, and to pick and choose what software I can run on my computer without it needing Apple’s stamp of approval to work.

It will be interesting to see which school of thought on this topic prevails, or whether there’s ample room to accommodate both.

CM