Is anyone surprised that I¹ have a post on the iPad? Thought so.

A good articulation of the concern I’ve always had since rumors of the tablet started, would be from an article at GDGT:

Will people buy it in droves? Is there actually room for a device between smartphones and laptops? That I don’t know — I’ve always been skeptical there’s room for a third category in there. But if there is a contender for this space, the iPad is it.

My knee-jerk answer would be “no” as far as how much people would actually prefer using this over laptops and phones. But then again, Apple has been known to be such a great “game changer” in any industry that they might just successfully create a new “perceived need” in the minds of the people.

However, having said all that, I still am getting one ;) Not only because of the hype; but I really feel this is exactly the type of “large factor” mobile device I would like to be lugging around instead of a laptop.

There are three reasons I want the iPad.

Reason One: Apple’s Sex Appeal

It’s just so fucking sexy.² What can I say, I’m a gear slut and this thing is so shiny and shit, how could I refuse!

Reason Two: Practical Usability

It addresses a bunch of usability issues I have with my iPhone/iPod Touch and my MacBook Pro.

MacBook Pro

When I got the Unibodies for Cris and myself, I was seriously considering getting a MacBook Air. Because over the range of Apple laptops I’ve owned, I really began to appreciate the value of size and weight. In a nutshell, I just don’t enjoy lugging a [heavy] laptop around anymore.

This is partly because of how I use the laptop when out of the house. My main computer is still the desktop – everything is done there. I only use the laptop when I need to do mundane things³ away from the main computer (if I’m eating, or lazy in bed). Out of the house, chances are I’ll be in a situation where there’s too much distractions for me to do anything “focused” so I’ll probably end up with surfing, emails, chatting, etc. the usual stuff an everyday internet-savvy user does.⁴ And you have to admit, having the computing power of a MacBook Pro to do those things is really unnecessary.

MacBook Air

So, I considered the MacBook Air – but eventually abandoned that thought because of its price.

I certainly could live with sacrificing power in favor of mobile practicality. But that doesn’t mean that there isn’t a tipping point as far as “premium paid” goes. The premium you pay for the MacBook Air is for its size/weight, and it’s only natural you trade-off some power/features to accomplish that – fair enough, right?

But when you get to the details of how much “function” you have to trade-off for form, that’s when it becomes a deal-breaker.

I always thought that at best, the Air should’ve been priced the same as the lowest end MacBook; roughly a thousand dollars. Because the thing is weaker than the weakest MacBook⁵ (hence lowers its “value”), but then it makes up for it by its form factor (hence increases its value). So it evens out with [as long as its compared to] a MacBook… not a MacBook Pro – which is where they decided to price against.

So as much as I was drawn to the Air’s appeal, the fact that there were tangible alternatives to put it’s value to the test, made it an easy decision for me to simply just get a MacBook Pro for the same price.⁶ Which left me stuck with the whole issue of having a much heavier device.

iPhone

Which brings me to the iPhone, it’s obvious that I believe in the product. Yes it has its weaknesses, but I still would rather lug an iPhone which can do a lot of the “mundane things” I like doing on the go – instead of carrying a laptop. That’s why I invested in it,⁷ that’s why I even bought apps for it.⁸ The iPhone for me was an extremely productive tool because of the applications that had augmented its value.

But, while it was productive, it was not necessarily “enjoyable.” The “viewing experience” (browsing, photos, etc.) was certainly unique enough to put a smile on the face of any first time user, but as you get used to it, no amount of cleverness could hide the the fact that there were compromises being made in order to make such a small device access media that was designed to be viewed in a larger screen.

In other words, smartphones in general, no matter how powerful they are, are really only good for “realtime quickies.” By “quickie” I mean those simple tasks that already have become part of our everyday routine; those things that only take a few seconds or minutes at the most to accomplish. Want to check important mail? No problem, wanna see a video everyone’s talking about? Got some minutes to spare while waiting for someone? Then sure, browse or watch a video, or go Twitter/Facebook-ing if you like. But doing all those things for extended periods, having to constantly pinch or tap just to read a single page, can get really old, really fast.

So there you have it; the iPhone/iPod “form” has its weaknesses – it’s just that those weaknesses weren’t a big deal at the time – simply because there were no other alternatives that could do it better… until now.

iPad

The tablet, in a nutshell, for my purposes, addresses what was missing from the MacBook Air (ideal price tag) and iPhone (decent screen size to work with for extended periods).

Given its size and weight, I can totally imagine myself lugging it wherever I go just like Cris would be bringing a Novel she’s currently reading. You can stow it just like you’d stow a book or magazine. And most importantly, the weight penalty is considerably less than bringing my MBP. I can totally imagine myself mailing, surfing, watching, or reading stuff with it for extended periods in the dining table, on the bed, or on the go.

Reason 3: Why The Fuck Not!?

Given everything discussed above, and the price point they put it in, I’d be crazy not to get one. To put things in perspective: my 16GB iPhone 3GS (a legally unlocked, non-plan-subsidized unit) cost me about 700-800 dollars.

Then we’ve got the iPad, which pretty much does the same thing, only much better – with its top-end configuration costing about the same as my “base” 3GS model. How can I not see that as a great deal?

Overall, I think it’s fairly priced (cheap even) for what it can do. Also, I don’t really see the iPad as an overgrown iPhone/iPod Touch like I joked about in the title. Instead I actually see it as what the iPhone/iPod Touch was supposed to be.⁹ In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if the conception of the iPhone/iPod Touch was possible because of their research/development of making a tablet.

As a side-note, I wouldn’t be surprised if the iPad cannibalizes the Air’s sales here on out. The Air is severely underpowered as it is, so if you’re willing to put up with an underpowered machine in the first place, then might as well get an iPad. That way, you still get what drew you to the Air (slim and light),¹⁰ and you get to save 400-800 dollars while you’re at it.

Of course the device is still far from being “ideal.” Here are some issues for me. Some major some minor. Some not important

No Flash support (minor)

It’s my understanding the reason Apple doesn’t want flash in Mobile OSX in general is because Flash acting up accounts for the majority of browser-related crashes in their desktops.

I honestly don’t know what to think if this in fact is true. On the one hand, I guess I wouldn’t want to force the issue if it compromises system stability… on the other hand, it’s nice to have the option of taking the risk.

In any case, lack of flash is more of an annoyance; that is to say the only reason I want it is because so many sites I come across need it – not necessarily because it’s a plugin that is necessary. If sites don’t use flash, then I don’t mind not having flash – simple as that.

No multi-tasking (major)

I understand that any mobile device may be too underpowered to handle “unlimited” multi-tasking like a desktop could. Still, it would’ve been nice to have even a “limited” implementation of it; maybe something like only being able to run 3-4 applications at the same time. Or being able to “sticky” a finite amount of applications to prevent them from being released from memory when you switch views/apps.

The iPad’s much larger screen simply begs for some semblance of multi-tasking – the screen real estate available is simply too big for a user not to expect/want it to multi-task. I can just imagine having a hotspot somewhere where you can switch between apps that are running in the background; surfing while chatting, etc.

Besides, if the Nexus can do it with a processor of the same speed¹¹ I don’t see why Apple can’t do the same – or at least some approximation of it.

No camera (not important)

… but wouldn’t it be awesome if you could video-conference with the iPad? Or I guess just be able to have some photo-booth fun with your peeps spontaneously.

But all these weaknesses are not enough to be deal-breakers as far as my “usage preference” goes. And there’s one aspect that “regular” consumers often forget and I’ll preface it with John Gruber’s opinion upon trying the tablet out:

Everyone I spoke to in the press room was raving first and foremost about the speed. None of us could shut up about it. It feels impossibly fast.

One major factor that allows something that’s otherwise underpowered by normal computing standards to perform wonderfully is a very efficient way of resource management. So the lack of multitasking, the lack of CPU intensive Flash decoding, the lack of this and that, all that contributes to all that speed and battery life.

Take the iPhone for example; imagine how much eye candy it’s able to crank out given its interface, yet it does it so seamlessly. Anybody who’s used to other mobile operating systems cannot deny that its amazing how they can make a smartphone as snappy as the iPhone is.

The Nexus One may be faster than the iPhone today, but still just as fast on average. And the 3GS has a 400MHz handicap at that (it runs @ 600MHz compared to Google’s 1GHz). Also if you hadn’t realized, the Nexus One’s processor is just as fast as the iPad’s. And iPad is said to be crazy fast while driving a considerably bigger display. Which brings me to another point from Gruber:

What happens if Apple has figured out a way to make a CPU like A4 that fits in an iPhone? If they pull that off for this year’s new iPhone, look out.

To end, I’ll leave you yet again some of Gruber’s words:

Apple now owns and controls their own mobile CPUs. There aren’t many companies in the world that can say that. And from what I saw today, Apple doesn’t just own and control a mobile CPU, they own and control the hands-down best mobile CPU in the world. Software aside (which is a huge thing to put aside), it may well be that no other company could make a device today matching the price, size, and performance of the iPad. They’re not getting into the CPU business for kicks, they’re getting into it to kick ass.

And kick ass they already have, and if the iPad’s any indication, they will continue to do.

btw, all the quotes I got from Gruber’s article @ Daringfireball.net