iPad=Giant iPhone Without the Phone
Essentially it’s an iTouch on steroids.
Apple showed off their new iPad today and . . it’s either going to become the benchmark by which home and casual computing is measured or it will fill that small niche market for people who hate Windows and find Macs too complicated and want a home version of their beloved iPhone.
For right now the iPad is literally just a giant iPhone that comes with same iPhone OS limitations. Either these short comings will steer the iPod towards a Newton-esc footnote of history or Steve Jobs and Apple will look like geniuses for convincing us that form can sometimes dominate over function.
Do we really need a 100 different I/O ports (USB, HDMI, S-video, SD card reader) on a portable computer or can we just use an adapter when we need to and keep the weight and thickness of the iPad low. Will we even need Adobe Flash or will new HTML standards replace it? Windows lets you have 11-teen thousand different programs running at once but is there much difference between switching from window to window and closing and opening iPhone apps if they do so rapidly?
Bill Gates has spent years and multiple versions of Windows trying to nuge the powerful OS to be more user friendly. With it’s much faster boot times and slick multi-touch interface, the iPad is much closer to this goal than Windows ever got. So it’s curious why it stops short and tries to be a giant iPhone. It could have been a little bigger. It should run more than one app. concurrently. It should be more business friendly. I should have been even cheaper.