Apple's iPad product announcement on Wednesday sent shockwaves across the entire Internet and technology industry. People responded in great numbers to Apple's new device, either with praise or acridity. There have been a few points that have been raised about this device, some of which I will highlight.
I understand the sentiment of the consumers out there who were hoping for a particular feature on the Apple iPad, features such as a webcam, camera, multi-tasking abilities, Adobe flash support, and the totalitarian nature of the iPad operating system. While I cannot explain Apple's decision to not include a front or rear facing camera, the lack of the other features can be explained.
Apple's approach to its mobile devices and any technological device in general is that it wants to leave the user with a good aftertaste. The biggest complaints that the average layperson has about computers are that they are hard to understand and they are slow or become slower over time. Apple's intent with the Mac, Macbook, iPod Touch, iPhone, and now the iPad product lines is to give the layperson a product that will be reliable to use, fulfills their needs, has a really gentle learning curve, and performs at its best regardless of its age. And that's exactly what Apple is going to deliver with its iPad.
The lament over multi-tasking isn't without its flaws: you can listen to your music while checking your emails. You can get push notifications while you're surfing the web. However, Apple is the one deciding which applications can run together and which cannot, which is an understandable concern. Apple has the final say on how their products operate because they designed it a certain way and they want to ensure that the consumers use it as intended. People who jailbreak, or use a software to take advantage of exploits in the iPhone operating system to install non-Apple approved apps, may be able to circumnavigate what is perceived as Apple's tyranny over its devices, but their devices become unstable and performance is decreased. Therefore, Apple keeps a iron fist on the software that goes onto their products to protect their users.
But Americans are known for loving their freedom and liberty! Why should Apple be the only one to get a say on what goes on their products? After all, Windows users have such a great flexibility on what goes on their machines and there are no major problems with that. But Apple's response to that is users are protected from software instability, malware, and otherwise unwanted malices that Windows users experience (BSODs, viruses, pop ups, etc.). That is not to say that apps on the iPhone OS do not crash, but they are in general much more stable than their Windows counterparts.
I am usually not a fan of politics, but Apple's approach to the lockdown of their products is eerily similar to that of the People's Republic of China. With a growing middle class who enjoy individual economic prosperity, the average Chinese citizen does not worry too much about their limited political voice and opinion. As long as they are happy with their lives, the government is doing a good job in their book. The same can be said about the average Apple user: as long as the user experience is great, the software is responsive, and what needs to be done gets done efficiently, there is no reason for the Apple user to be unhappy with Apple's lockdown.
Apple's lockdown is also the reason why Apple mobile devices still do not have Flash support. Apple is unwilling to work with Adobe to get flash working on mobile Safari because it cites the instability, resource-intensiveness, and insecurity of flash. All of these claims are mostly true, but we don't notice this on a day to day basis with our computers because today's laptops and desktops are mammoths compared to the mobile devices that comfortably slip into our pant pockets. For a device with limited computing power, every hertz of processing power is sacred. The current argument for supporting Flash on mobile devices is that users do not get the true Internet experience without it because many websites depend on flash to work properly, such as Hulu, Disney, etc. However, this is a weak argument because HTML5, the updated standard for the most fundamental web coding language, supports rich media, which means flash can be ditched entirely in the future. Youtube, Viemo, and mobile Google Voice have updated their websites to support HTML5, so rich media content such as videos, music, and interactive websites can be done without relying on Flash or other plugins. I, for one, support Apple's decision to keep Flash off of their mobile devices because I see Flash as just a web coding crutch, just like frames and tables were crutches for good web page designs.
So in true Apple revolutionary product release tradition, I will wait to see how well the first generation operates then see how Apple updates its iPod Touch product line. If the iPad is significantly improved, specifically a webcam/camera and cheaper price points, I may contemplate getting the device. After all, as Jony Ive, the senior vice president of design for Apple, says that the iPad "exceeds your ability to understand how it works, it sort of becomes magical". It'll take me at least until the second generation of the iPad to try to understand how the magical device works and if it's worth my money.
For the full story and others like it, check out my blog.
No comments:
Post a Comment