InfoWeek weighs in

[sleigh]

A thoughtful article in InfoWeek about how they see the iPad as being truly revolutionary, and how it might alter the publishing industry.

Interesting to see the wide range of reactions across the web toward the device. There are a lot of nay-sayers, but then there was a lot of negative reaction when Jobs and Apple first introduced the iPod, too. For instance, here's a MacRumors forum from 2001 as the iPod was being launched, where the majority of the comments are "this is a stupid and useless device, and this is going to be a total dud for Apple."

What are your thoughts?

Comments

[guppiecat]

I love Apple's technology but hate their DRM.

I'll likely get a tablet device once I can run something on it that doesn't get in the way of what I want to do. I don't much care about the maker as I do the functionality.

[coraa.livejournal.com]

I'd get the iPad as a tablet computer, but not as an e-reader, more or less.

[sethb.livejournal.com]

It would be worth something to me if it were an actual computer rather than an iPod on steroids.

[minnehaha.livejournal.com]

It's the device that will finally make the pad computer mainstream. Taking the iPhone and making it bigger was brilliant.

B

[barbarienne.livejournal.com]

I like empiricism. (ETA: which is to say, I want to see what the consumer population does and how Apple responds to criticism based on actual use.)

I like the idea of the iPad. I refuse to get a laptop for reasons that regular laptop users would scoff at, but I would happily get something even smaller if it does what I need it to do.

The iPad is still missing a little bit of functionality, but I hope a second generation will add things.

[mrbankies.livejournal.com]

I'm very intrigued by the possibilities of the device. I can't see myself ever giving up dead tree reading, but after my last business trip I'm starting to come around to the idea of eBooks. The biggest drawback to Kindle, to me, was the screen, which the iPad solves

The only drawback I see to it right now is the lack of support for Flash when web surfing. Apple clearly wants to position as the "go to" device for internet access without resorting to a full blown computer. I'm no fan of flash, and I understand Apple's stance, but it's far to ubiquitous to push that particular agenda without it.

I'd really to to get one, but will probably wait until the first refresh to take the plunge.

[minnehaha.livejournal.com]

http://io9.com/5458822/why-the-ipad-is-crap-futurism

B

[sleigh.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I saw that one. It reminds me of some of the articles I read about the iPod back when it came out.

[sleigh.livejournal.com]

Waiting for v2 is often a good idea, no matter who's making the device.

[minnehaha.livejournal.com]

One of the morals is that many many people don't type anywhere near as much as the people who write computer columns.

B

[minnehaha.livejournal.com]

The comment about Apple wanting to control software on the iPod/iPad, unlike a computer where the user has control, is the big story here I think. I believe that the big OS players -- Microsoft, Apple -- are convinced that they made a bit mistake ceding control to the user in the PC market, and are making very sure they don't do it again unless they have no choice. Think phones, PDAs, game consoles, video viewers, and so on.

This (http://www.schneier.com/essay-204.html) is relevent.

B

[sleigh.livejournal.com]

I remember reading that... and I'd agree with your analysis. Control = profit.

[minnehaha.livejournal.com]

In any market system, profits tend to flow to the most constrained member of the supply chain. For example: airports make most of the profits from the restaurants, because airport space is the most constrained part of that system. By enforcing control over what software can run on a given platform, the platform owners artificially constrain their part of the supply chain.

B

[minnehaha.livejournal.com]

Version 3.0 for Microsoft stuff.

B