A few of the things the doubters were wrong about.
I was very skeptical about the iPad, and I remain somewhat so. My main concern is that the iPad is a device that attempts to create a new type of digital experience, never an easy thing to accomplish. It bravely (or stupidly) foregoes features in favor of simplicity (sometimes to its own detriment, as in the case of its lack of Flash support).
However, there is one thing that makes me wonder if it mightn’t be a huge success: its detractors.
You see, I’ve been a Mac user and enthusiast for years, and while my adoration for Apple has chilled over the years, I haven’t adopted the same knee-jerk frustration with everything Apple that some in the technology field have.
Many in this group were quick to claim the iPad an instant flop. They proudly announced all of its perceived shortcomings compared to other devices, without considering the totality of the iPad experience. They took joy in announcing every flaw, without ever having used one. And, they believe their cynicim makes them superior to Apple “fanboys,” even though their logic is just as flawed.
Yet, because this same group of outspoken cynics have been so wrong about Apple’s products in the past, I’m wondering if they mightn’t be wrong again:
- This is the same group who, in 1997, told us Apple would be out of business within a year or two.
- They predicted the iPod would be a failure because it was so simplistic.
- They proclaimed the iMac a toy because it sacrificed robust computing power for a compact user experience.
- They argued the iPhone was just another smart phone, and would be trounced by Blackberry.
- They predicted Apple’s decision to forego floppy drives would render Macs obsolete.
- They warned us that Apple’s wholesale move from serial to USB was a mistake of epic proportions.
- And they told us Apple’s retail stores would sit empty, save for the occasional fanboy eager to buy his latest toy.
They will tell you they never said these things. They will say they’re not buying into the cult of Apple. They will point out the occasions when they were, in fact, right. They will claim all of Apple’s success is due to great marketing. And, frankly, many of their arguments are quite valid.
But I keep coming back to this point: regular people – consumers – seem to love a lot of the things Apple does, regardless of what this other group of technophiles predicts. Whereas the technies often argue Apple doesn’t offer enough features, options, or flexibility, it seems people actually prefer a consistent, smooth, intuitive experience over bloat. And they seem to be willing to pay for it.
There are many reasons to believe the iPad will not live up to the hype (how could it, really?).
But there’s one reason to believe it might do quite well: the cynics are wrong so often, the odds are they’ll be wrong this time, too.
Some related links:
- Gizmodo’s Adam Frucci on 8 Things that Suck About the iPad
- Read Write Web’s How to Hate the iPad
- PC World’s 10 Things We Hate About Apple
- Grumpy Nerd’s I Hate Apple Computers
It is far easier to sit back, criticize and pull apart a finished work, or even a first draft, than it ever is to sit down and make/solve/create something in the first place.
Opinions are like Apples… everyone should have one, but you don’t necessarily have to share.
I think of it this way. If the experts, analysts and forecasters were right with any consistent frequency they would be in business for themselves, making millions.
I loved the iMac. I thought iTunes was a great idea, but wouldn’t make any money (and hence didn’t buy any apple stock
I still don’t know how to turn off an iPod, though. And just changing the volume on it is a total pain in the ass. But my iPod Touch is the greatest thing for the kids.
The problem is, that like most things in life, it’s neither one thing or the other.
Michael, this article is right up your alley:
http://www.fastcompany.com/article/quiz-are-these-comments-about-2001-ipod-or-2010-ipad?page=0%2C0
Dan, excellent link. Proves what some people are saying: the experts don’t get it. They look at the details and, apparently, miss the overall picture. I remain cautiously skeptical about the iPad, but I definitely can see how I’d use one in my life.
I’m doubtful of iPad myself for my own myriad reasons but like you have seen Apple surprise naysayers again and again.
More than anything, if the iPad takes off, I think it will cue us that culturally $500 can still be an impulse item purchase.
That said, Apple is a mortal company and have made their share of bad calls: Newton, The Cube, The Air.
If Apple does nail it, then $500 may not seem like an impulse purchase but a down payment on a new type of media experience. If they don’t, then they won’t sell any, and $500 will seem like folly. Their goal, assuming the device works as promised, will be not only to advertise the product, but to explain the experience.
I believe, ultimately, we won’t be tethered to computers the way we are today, but surrounded by media devices that do things much like the iPad. They may range in physical dimensions and capabilities, but they will be less about hardware and more about experience.
I can imagine, much the way the guys at HP did when they designed their first tablet, people walking around their houses, picking up a tablet to check the weather, read the paper, check email, and so on. They won’t plop themselves down at a laptop or desktop, and they won’t be confined to a tiny iPhone or other PDA-sized device. The physical interaction may be more intimate, as with a book or newspaper, not like the reduced but complex computing experience a netbook offers.
Whether Apple nails it or not, and whether the iPad is the first real, viable step toward this type of experience is, of course, up in the air (no pun intended).
Interesting article about why some of the iPad’s technical limitations may be strengths: http://www.lukew.com/ff/entry.asp?994
I think the author could go further and talk about how the form factor affects functionality. With computers, for example, their form is ideal for peripherals such as mice and keyboards that allow for complex interactions and multitasking environments. Tablets, however, are better suited for passive engagement than active input, so less features and functions are required.
I’m not sure I completely buy the Flash argumet, but I’m willling to see if Jobs and others are correct in their assertion that HTML 5 will provide a viable alternative to Flash. Only time will tell.
Thanks to Alex (http://usablemarkets.com) for the link.
Thanks to Alex