Daniel Eran Dilger
Random header image... Refresh for more!

Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 4. It was over-hyped and under-delivered

Daniel Eran Dilger

Here’s segment four in my series taking on iPad myths: no the iPad wasn’t over-hyped and then under-delivered.

Ten Myth of Apple’s iPad: 1. It’s just a big iPod touch
Ten Myth of Apple’s iPad: 2. iPad needs Adobe Flash
Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 3. It’s ad-evil
Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 4. It was over-hyped and under-delivered
Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 5. It’s just a Tablet PC or Kindle
Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 6. It needs HDMI for HD video output
Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 7. It needs cameras
Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 8. It’s a curse for mobile developers
Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 9. It can’t multitask
Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 10. It needs Mac OS X
.

Dear People Who Didn’t See It: 4. It’s a myth iPad was over-hyped and under-delivered.

The biggest complaint about the iPad seems to come from people who didn’t see it: what’s the point? There’s also plenty of people who did see it came away without seeing the point, the value, the advance in technology, its invisible user interface savvy, or who might want to buy one. They contend that Apple overhyped the iPad but then didn’t deliver.

The reality is that Apple didn’t hype the iPad at all. It didn’t release any teaser visions or vaporware specifications, or float any initiatives that weren’t likely to ever get delivered. If anything, the company and its executives remained oddly silent–certainly nothing new for Apple, but a very uncharacteristic way to introduce a product in the tech industry in general.

Look at some examples for context: Michael Arrington’s CrunchPad: nothing but hype, this vision didn’t meet its price goals, feature goals, or even realize its idealistic open source technology sharing dreams. How about the overhyped XO? Again, it blew way over budget, ended up rather anemic and spurned Steve Jobs’ offer to use Mac OS X on righteous GPL grounds only to fail to badly that its leader was ready to adopt the completely closed and proprietary Windows platform.

Steve Jobs: Apple tablet “the most important thing I’ve ever done”
Apple hires One Laptop Per Child security expert and noted critic

How about commercial efforts to deliver a tablet-like device? Palm’s Foleo didn’t make it past the demo stage. Microsoft’s Courier idea was similarly just a distracting vision without any realism attached, hyped into the stratosphere by the same clowns who are trying to make out that apple raised lofty expectations and then stomped all over them. Google is floating conceptual pictures of a Chrome OS iPad that only lets you browse the web… and now those very sketchy details are being touted by the tech clowns as potential iPad-killers.

Corporate legal scrambles to withdraw inflated Palm Pre claims
Ars’ Jon Stokes hails Chrome OS as the second coming of the PC

The truth is, if Apple is guilty of setting up any expectations for the iPad, it was only to suggest the price would be twice as high and that it wouldn’t be nearly as successful as the iPhone.

Jobs didn’t oversell anything; he understated Apple’s interest in entering the ebook arena with something like iBooks, Apple didn’t even allude to the possibility of a futuristic multitouch tablet for enjoying an enhanced albums and movies experience when showing off iTunes Extras and iTunes LPs last fall, and the company has made no trumped up prognostications about how it will expand the popular App Store into more sophisticated desktop applications like those demonstrated for the first time on the iPad, from Calendar to iWork.

Speaking from the Ars.

Jon Stokes of Ars Technica created a matrix of general features (“a list of stuff that I personally care about in a mobile device,” he wrote) which seemed intent on suggesting that iPad doesn’t do anything a regular smartphone does not already do or that a bunch of competing tablet devices plan to do real soon now.

For example, Stokes dismissed Apple’s invention of the multitouch office suite by listing the feature “use office apps,” and then crediting both smartphones and “a bazillion other tablets in 2010” as being able to already do this. How ignorantly simplistic and misleading to equate a full screen, multitouch office suite with Documents to Go on a Palm Pilot or Microsoft’s ridiculous Pocket Office apps.

Mobile Docs

Stokes used the same generalization to dismiss Apple’s commanding lead with iTunes, the App Store, and even the iPhone’s revolutionary mobile Safari browser that competitors haven’t really caught up to over the last three years, even with Nokia, Google, and everyone else able to leverage Apple’s open source WebKit code.

Dr. Ernest Prabhakar, who has long managed Apple’s Mac OS X open source strategy at Apple, wrote on the Roughly Drafted Facebook page (which you should join, as there’s lots of smart people writing interesting things in the discussions) that Ars’ list reducing iPad to a list of features “is like reducing the experience of eating chocolate to a list of chemicals.”

He also recently retweeted a post by Macworld’s Dan Moren that all the anger about the iPad was reminiscent of what Yoda said about anger coming from fear. Clearly, lots of people are scared silly about the iPad.

Roughly Drafted | Facebook

Are you kidding me Engadget?

But Ars’ certainly wasn’t alone in denigrating the iPad as being nothing new. A trio of Engadget editors pretty much panned the iPad as being “fairly underwhelming […] unimaginative might be more accurate,” “jack of some trades, a master of none,” and “a huge letdown — no groundbreaking display technology, no advanced user interface, no particularly interesting ways for the device to interact with the other devices and computers in your home.”

Wow really? What kind of display technology were you looking for, an OLED panel that would cost much more and really only deliver a screen that only looked good in candlelit vigils, like the Zune HD? Engadget thought that was pretty cool, but it hasn’t sold worth beans and nobody cares about it.

What sort of advanced user interface would trump the hybrid use of familiar iPhone controls and Mac OS X desktop concepts? Something you’d need a manual to figure out? The most advanced user interface is one you don’t notice!

And what would be a particularly interesting way for the iPad to interact with other devices if not the ability to seamlessly discover and peer connect via Bluetooth or network over users’ existing WiFi networks, both things that iPhone 3.0 delivered nearly a near ago or longer? This isn’t criticism, it’s straight up ignorance.

From OLED to Tegra: Five Myths of the Zune HD

Waaa, I miss the 1990s.

Engadget writers just kept going: “iPad is, in my mind, one of Apple’s biggest misses,” “as the harsh reality of the facts began to sink in, my hopes and dreams for a revolutionary device were crushed […] I was looking for something new and innovative […] I was also shocked and saddened to find that the iPad runs on what seems to be just a fancy version of iPhone OS.”

Yes, what kind of foolish company is Apple for basing all of its mobile devices on the same operating system? Microsoft has at least two massively different kernels in play and Google has two completely different operating system strategies with Android and Chrome OS. Why is Apple scaling a single kernel and development platform from its smartphone to its mobile media player to its tablet to its desktop systems?

Oh right, the conventional Mac OS X desktop has the POWER (missing from the modern iPhone OS) to also let you run Carbon apps from the 1990s like Office and Photoshop, as well as that plethora of Java software that should fit right in on a multitouch panel. OH THE HUMANITY. STOP SAYING STUPID THINGS.

Microsoft frets Google’s Nexus One will suffer Zune’s failure

They keep going like chatty cathy dolls that pull their own strings.

The iPad was enough to unearth Mark Stephens’ “I, Cringely” character. He bewailed the iPad’s lack of support for Adobe’s Flash, writing, “there’s some weird daddy thing going on there with Apple’s rejection of Flash and I am tired of it.” Cringely concluded, “you know what it feels like to me with it’s [sic] hype followed by an underwhelming reality? It feels like another Segway.”

I, Cringely » Blog Archive » iPad, Therefore I Am

Why’s that Cringely? Is the iPad impossibly expensive? Ugly? Illegal to use on the sidewalk due to knee jerk political panic? Or did you just want some trite thing to flippantly say that is neither relevant nor articulated in any way, just to get quoted as a luminary? Because the last ten million things you’ve said were all wrong as I recall. You’re right up there with John Dvorak.

Paul Thurrott hates the iPad for various reasons, but who cares? None of them are even fleetingly interesting to even consider.

Reader Per Grenerfors summarized Thurrott’s entire series of articles naysaying the iPad (at least five so far!) into a single line that pretty much sums up Thurrott’s opinion of everything that will ever be designed by the company: “Apple […] really isn’t the type of company we want controlling things.” Thurrott sounds like Glenn Beck speaking into a fancy telephone that replaces all occurrences of “Obama” with “Apple.”

WWDC Secrets Paul Thurrott Hopes You Miss
Paul Thurrott’s Merciless Attack on Artie MacStrawman
Paul Thurrott calls Apple “the Bad Guys” of Microsoft’s $300 million ad campaign

  • sprockkets

    All the naysayers are dissing a device they’ve never used but praise a device (Courier) that’s all vaporware. Typical.

    “It wasn’t the name I wanted it to be!” is another stupid thing to say too.

    I’m not going to pass judgment on a device I’ve never seen in person. So I will neither praise it nor diss it.

  • stormj

    Yes, yes, indeed. Isn’t it ironic how all of the geek-world haters who claim to want something revolutionary are all at the same time demanding 1990s technologies like Flash, Carbon-based apps, styluses, and so forth?

  • http://scottworldblog.wordpress.com scotty321

    Daniel, your commentaries are the best! Lovin’ the videos!!

  • miloh

    I think the next time I see someone complaining about missing features in the iPad I’m going to send them a copy of Bell Biv DeVoe’s Poison album.

    The videos are great, Dan. Keep ’em coming. :)

  • Pingback: uberVU - social comments()

  • http://berendschotanus.com Berend Schotanus

    About the video:
    There’s a lot of progress! It is amazing to see how effective a few intermediate pictures with a little pan and zoom can be. The intermediate titles were a bit short to read (especially since they use a more complex font). What works particularly well is seeing an article or product while you talk about it.
    I’m looking forward to the moment you put the video on an iPod-feed in iTunes.

    About the content:
    I particularly liked the notion you gave about fear.

  • joshdean

    There’s a difference between saying that Steve Jobs and Co. did the best they possibly could, better than any of their competitors have been able to, in coming up with this product, and claiming that this was a revolutionary device on the order of the iPhone. We like to believe our idols are omniscient, but the fact is there are some periods when its possible to make a giant leap, and others when its only possible, due to limits in existing technological capability, to make a smaller, more evolutionary move. A lot of bored people in the world wanted to be entertained to the max last week by their favorite tech. genius, and pouted when even the Great Jobs wasn’t able to totally re-invent the wheel this time around. Dan, you’re right to single out those who are entirely missing the deeply innovative potential of the iPad. But as for the ones making the more reasonable claim that this particular product underwhelms by comparison with the ooh aah standard set by the iPhone’s debut,
    I think the best response isn’t just to ‘protest too much’, but to counter that sometimes the best possible move is linear rather than exponential, and there is just as much genius in pulling this off as there is in the rarer, drool-inducing event for the indulgence of idol-worshipping geek-lemmings .

  • DesperateDan

    Another top read, brilliant stuff.

    The worst I’ve seen so far (and by far) is Sarah Perez in the NY Times (no link supplied as I don’t want to encourage her…). Suffice to say she’s bordering on insanity in her Google Tablet vs iPad piece. Or at least she is until you look at her own site and realise that she’s been bought and paid for by Microsoft…

    She mentions the ExoPC, a slate that’s not even out yet, which gets the vomit inducing headline “ExoPC: A Beautiful and Functional Tablet Computer”. It is of course a Win7 lump of junk. 8.9″ yet with 3 USB ports and Ethernet! Do these guys never learn? They’ve just made a standard laptop really, really small, without addressing the fact that you will use such a different form in a completely different way.

    Apple has thought hard about how you would interact with something so small. Their usability team has started from nothing and only added what’s required. Remember Job’s quote about being as proud of the things Apple hasn’t done as the things it has? Same here. It’s easy to just cram in everything including the kitchen sink but much, much harder to leave out things many people take for granted, in order to make for a better complete experience.

    You would think that the competition would have realised this when they competed with the iPod but they just don’t, and probably never will.

  • Per

    Another good one. I like that you credit ideas from the Facebook discussion page.

    The background in this video is much less distracting and works well. I would still recommend putting your macbook on something so it gets closer to eye-level.

    Also, image quality is about light, light light and light. Try putting a low power lamp behind your laptop. You want warm light coming from the angle of your camera to even out shodows from the side light that kind of make you look pale (or maybe you’re recovering from the flu). And like someone else said, do slower video transitions and let the viewer get a good look at the picture slides you show. You don’t want to hurry people along.

    What I used to do is that I shot segments of what I want to say. Doing the “one take” approach is very hard. It demands Jobsian skills and focus ;-) It lets you stay more focused and you end up doing less (and better) editing. A short storyboard on paper on front of you before you start shooting is a great help.

    I don’t want to be nit-picking, but better production techniques help the viewer concentrate on what you’re actually saying. It’s kind of like good typography for a newspaper. Your videos have improved since your first video and you’re one the of the smartest observers out there so I hope you continue making videos even after you’re done with the myth series.

    Thanks again for all the great work.

  • Maniac

    +1 Daniel. Apple never said a word about iPad until Jobs actually announced it. And I agree that all the haters are afraid they’re going to be left behind, that they’re too deeply entrenched in the old 1980s productivity metaphor that traditional PC are stuck in.

    But look at it this way. All the thousands of words written against iPad, claiming it doesn’t do enough or that it’s too “closed” were blasted into insignificance by iPad’s little cameo appearance at the Grammy awards.

    “Oh, I know. It’s on my iPad.” BOOM!

    The target market doesn’t read Engadget or post on Gizmodo. They’re ready for something easier and better, and iPad is it. Hmmm. I wonder if there will be an iPad commercial during the Super Bowl…

  • bartb

    I am really really really annoyed by the (MS) pundits who are obviously being paid to lie. I mean, nobody is that stupid… right?

    I wonder what it feels like to accept money for saying things you don’t actually believe yourself…

  • enzos

    watching the video with quicktime.. the visuals and production quality are really getting better each episode.

    Vapourware: Courier looks tragically bad! I laughed.

    With SJ and Apple putting so much thought and effort into it I’m see a paradigm sift here. Can’t wait!

  • shen

    i hate to encourage you too much, don’t want you to get a big head, but once again, excellent analysis…

  • gus2000

    “You’re right up there with John Dvorak.”

    oh snap, part 4

  • gus2000

    Daniel, the videos are coming out great. For a good example, watch iJustine’s videos, and then lower the goofy energy quotient by about 90%.

  • tmay

    Daniel,

    Gone unsaid in all of this ruckus is a $ billion that Apple is putting into N. Carolina for a server farm.

    People talk about Cloud Computing, but when I look at the iPad, I’m thinking, hmm, maybe there’s a bit going on behind the scenes to give the iPad a bit of Cloud Computing mojo. Maybe, the brains at Apple are way ahead of us again.

    Monday, I saw the image below, and thought to myself, here’s somebody that gets it:

    http://www.deelip.com/?p=1277

    Yes indeed, it is a work in progress of a cloud version of SolidWorks running on a mac.

    So the way I see it, if you can run what is considered workstation class software on a mac in a cloud, how much of a reach is it to create an interface for the iPad?

  • http://thepulse.ca shawnpetriw

    Daniel,

    I think you should try out blip.tv for your videos. Customizable player, and ability to subscribe via RSS to iTunes.

    http://blip.tv

  • T. Durden

    I agree with the comments above – the videos are really good. Look forward to watching more on my iPad in the not too distant future.

    Speaking of the iPad – it’s clearly a revolutionary device. As far as I’m concerned, it will be able to do a lot of what I’d normally use my MacBook for. And if the iBookstore would be made available to us non-Americans, perhaps even along with the possibility to buy movies via iTunes (also US only, currently), then so much better.

  • Pingback: Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 4. It was over-hyped and under-delivered « iNewΙΤ()

  • miloh

    @T. Durden — Excellent comment. I think an aspect of the problem is many people really aren’t aware of what they use their computers for, at least not on a regular basis. I think many feel they are constant power-users, not realizing just how often the thing is little more than a dumb terminal. I think they’d be surprised if they really took a good look at their usage patterns.

  • mpku

    I just wanted to say how much I enjoyed this site. It’s fantastic.

  • harrywolf

    Yeah, actual usage is something that people (consumers of all types) wont ever get real about.
    In the marine industry, we deal with customers who stack their boats with gear for a trip to Antarctica or the Amazon, and 99.9% of them either (a) never leave the dock and drink all weekend or, (b) use the boat for the North American average of a colossal 100 hours per year. 4 days per YEAR!
    Its the same with computers – everyone has multiple processors and a hard drive full of crap, and 4 gigs of ram, (but its never enough), and they go to Facebook and download music.
    The definition of a power user is actually someone who types over 200 words a week and has ever emailed a self-generated document, (NOT to a friend).
    Its not the Facebook/porn/sports browser guy.

    At $499, the iPad will allow exactly the kind of use that most people need – and IF, and thats a big IF, they want to type a document compatible with Word, they can. Photos, music, the Web, movies, – its all there for $499.

    Huge sales, new product category status within two years, and another massive hit from Apple.
    If they eventually drop the low-end model price, as they often do, it will be the Tsunami of bankruptcy for Palm and others.

  • http://macsmarticles.blogspot.com Derek Currie

    The iPad was incredibly hyped, by people who knew nothing about it, starting 6 months before even an inkling of fact was known about its existence. The disease of Hollywood gossip is here in the midst of the computer community. I suppose it was inevitable. But it is also inevitably BORING and INCORRECT.

    Rumor mongers: Save your breath and your fingers until you actually KNOW something.

    And thank you Apple for NOT hyping.

  • ChuckO

    One demerit to Apple for the “Magical and revolutionary” tag and the iPad video especially Ive’s part. They played right into the haters hands with those boob moves. The iPad video SUCKS and Ive’s looks and sounds like a creep right out of Apple haters fantasies! If you have to tell people it’s “Magical and revolutionary” your undermining your own argument AND making Dan’s job harder in this post.

  • miloh

    @ChuckO — I agree the screw up with the video was bad, but it happens. Apple isn’t the first to make such an error nor will they be the last. Claiming the iPad is revolutionary is frankly just marketing. That’s what companies do. Turn on the TV and in one-hour you’ll be subjected to numerous such subject claims. At least that’s how it is where I live.

  • miloh

    er … that second-to-last line should have read, “… you’ll be subjected to numerous such subjective claims.”

  • ChuckO

    Miloh, The messaging was oddly off for this release. Way to self-congratulatory with the “magical and revolutionary” and the video. The event was paced wrong. The walk through’s (sp?) were to thorough. We didn’t need that level of depth on the iWork demo’s. The word “magical” makes me throw-up in my mouth (anybody else hear Doug Henning when they hear that?) a little and you should never need to tell people it’s either “Magical or revolutionary”. It just doesn’t feel like that!!! It feels evolutionary not revolutionary and there’s nothing wrong with that except they turn around AND TELL YOU IT’S “Magical and revolutionary”. DAHHHHH!!!!!!

  • mpschaefer

    @ChuckO – I’m not sure the Ive’s Video is as big a mis-step as this. Personally, what I took away from it was less about his claims on the iPad being “magical” and more the passion he has for the design of, and the interaction with the iPad.

    For me, I have not watched the Keynote ( I have to wait until it can be downloaded rather than streamed given my bandwidth issues ) but I see it as very much a “wait and see” device and one that I guess you need to hold and play with to determine if it “fits” with me. I did this with the Apple Newton many years ago and I did find myself in awe of the device when I had it it my hands despite the poor reviews and comments in the press.

  • ulicar

    I am a naysayer and I do not really like any device currently out there. iPad had a chance to be great, but is not. It is mediocre at best. My opinion is based on the info available. And not only that, it looks like Apple is hearing this criticism, because there are reports of a last minute upgrade to the iPad and inclusion of a camera (as one). If that is true, good on them.

    You cannot run cocoa OS X applications either! Do you know what you need to do to have iPod/iPhone/big iPod application? You need to make it specifically for the device using iPhone SDK and XCode (make iPhone application option). You cannot run iPhone apps on OS X without the emulator. Do you people know anything about the stuff you would to talk about? Damn! Is your approach to the discussion “a lie said enough number of times becomes a truth”? All of you who claim cocoa OS X applications can run on iPhone are liars. It is as simple as that.

    It is great dishing Google for two operating systems, forgetting conveniently that Apple has 3 (three) operating systems. OS X, iPhone/iPod and iPad. You will not be able to run applications written for iPad on iPod and iPhone and not all of iPhone/iPod applications will work on iPad. Not that you will get something extra with iPad, because you will not, it just will not work. Btw the kernel is not operating system. Kernel is a kernel. Do you ever know anything about the topic you would like to talk about?

    If you think Apple did nothing to hype this product, ask yourselves, how come Colbert had it, and you don’t have a clue when it will be available for purchase.

    you ppl are simple sheeps in a Apple hurd, ready for fleecing :) This is actually quite good metaphore.

  • OlsonBW

    These are the same people that have no vision for the future can’t wrap their heads around hybrid cars and how they are currently the best vehicles for reducing pollution and, oh yes, getting 25% better gas mileage.

    I’m sure they would have been terrified of the automobile and have no clue that they would one day go over 200 mph. Not average ones, but then Apple isn’t average.

    For me the question is not whether to buy an iPad or not. It’s where I want the expense (monthly $15 or $30 times 12 months/yr) or how much memory to get. I’ll probably spend the extra $200 for the 64 gb version.

  • http://macsmarticles.blogspot.com Derek Currie

    @ulicar, why the troll attitude?
    “you ppl are simple sheeps in a Apple hurd, ready for fleecing :) This is actually quite good metaphore.”

    Setting aside your multiple spelling errors, the only ‘Baaaaah!’ I am hearing is you regarding the iPad, as in ‘Bah Humbug!’

    Fine. You don’t like it. I personally don’t want one myself. But such devices have an excellent future ahead. Let’s watch the future unfold. Let’s NOT trample reasonable opinions with dumbass troll-worthy sheep slams lest we yawn at you and trample you back.

  • miloh

    @ulicar — Do YOU ever know what you’re talking about? If you did, you would know that the term “operating system” is subjective and depends greatly upon context. As for the running of full-fledged desktop-style Cocoa apps on the iPad, did anybody here ever actually claim that it could? I don’t recall that, but I admit I may have overlooked it. Please identify the post number(s).

  • bartfat

    @ulicar
    I’m beginning to wonder whether you’re Teckstud (a user that got banned on AppleInsider because he professed to love Apple products, but really spent most of his time writing about hating them… not even doing his research when complaining). But anyway, that part about the kernel wasn’t quite accurate. It is true that iPhone/iPad/Mac OS all share the same kernel, while Windows Mobile, Zune, Windows, and xBox all have different kernels adapted to different products. But that’s not even relevant to the iPad… it’s just another straw man argument saying that they should have developed an entirely new OS for no good reason to do this multi-touch.

    This argument is usually spouted by people who “say” they like Apple, but secretly would like them to fail, so they decide to act as a critic as a facade, instead of a real lobbyist like they are. Which is why I think tech news is crap, except this site. Ars Technica usually is okay, but when it comes to Apple, all the fangs are out, and I don’t doubt why. They are a PC site, and you have to know that their audience comes from rapid PC fanboys who argue that everyone who bought a Mac are assholes in the comments. So frankly, it’s sort of pointless to try to correct them, unfortunately they’re paid to spread FUD.

    The other thing about Apple is that they supposedly did ask Colbert to have an iPad on hand for the Grammy’s so that more people could know about it (everyone that didn’t see the keynote on the 27th). It’s not hype, it’s called MARKETING… product placement isn’t uncommon for other brands, but when they do it for Apple, apparently every troll goes bonkers criticizing the placement. And Apple did say when it is shipping… end of March. So I don’t know why you then had a personal attack against everyone else… funny, it always seems like the crazy ones think they’re against the world and they’re right.

    @Daniel
    Of course, you do it because… well why do you correct them? I guess it’s because you feel a need to comment on the facts and somehow dispel their mistaken notions? Anyway, great job on the article, just in the video, might help to review it at least once after you edited, since it sort of cut out mid-word everytime you switched to a different section to talk about. But yea, overall I think the video is a great addition :)

    P.S.
    Just noticed it seems like I’m an anti-ulicar, which would be negating the negative and leaving only the reasonable criticisms… and adding a few benefits ;) Maybe I give some… perspective.. to quote from a pretty famous Pixar movie ;)

  • ChuckO

    mpschaefer 28, I’m not harshing on the iPad. I think it’ll be a great device for a lot of situations. I’m just saying the initial marketing hasn’t been up to Apple’s standards. It’s ABSOLUTELY CRAZY to call it “magical and revolutionary” in your marketing because if that was true you wouldn’t need to tell people that! They knew they had a device that was going to be underwhelming in terms of flashiness and decided to try and jam the “magical and revolutionary” down our throats. They are overselling. Normally Apple only does that when Job’s is going superlative crazy during events and because it’s Job’s and he’s a mad genius it’s fun and after that they normally go fairly understated and let the product speak for itself. They aren’t here and I suspect that’s because they are insecure about a whole new product type.

    As to the iPad video, I personally find Ive’s obnoxious and self-congratulatory and the rest of the video follows suit. The unibody video was cool because the unibody was kind of an amazing thing.

    I could even see “revolutionary” working in certain situations but “magical”‘s embarrassing.

    They should have just made the tagline something like “So you say you want a revolution!”.

  • ulicar

    Actually the definition of an operating system is not even close to be “subjective”. It is, as is everything in IT quite specific and it goes like: OS is a layer that sits on top of the hardware and provides a simplified interface for manipulating the hardware. It includes a kernel (most of the times), but not only kernel. I know, I can teach at uni you maybe could attend.

    Many times in this discussion somebody like stormj claimed that all naysayers are against iPhone OS because it cannot run (ancient technology) carbon based applications among others. Actually Dan did that as well. Claiming that is actually a lie by omission, because it cannot run cocoa applications either, unless they were made specifically for the device.

    I do not love or hate Apple. I am not invested with them in any way. I did develop some commercially successful apps for OS X, but I do not do that anymore. I love a good piece of machinery and if iPad was in my opinion good, I would not say anything against it. I point to the shortcomings of the device, and I am sure it will fail. If it doesn’t, I was wrong. I am not twofaced, I do love my iPhone, but it does have shortcomings I could live with on smartphone, but not on a tablet. Actually I just realized, you do not understand what FUD means. FUD is fear-uncertainty-doubt. I do not do that, because I point to the specific points, not some vague blah. Specific problems and why those problems are problems. Like in the case of flash. I do not care for the flash one single bit, but if I am not able to access 75% of multimedia online, that sucks. If apple created their flash player, or application that can show flash multimedia, like YouTube, but not limited to YouTube that would be great.

    I am not troll. I am replying to misinformation provided by Dan and some of readers in hope that the rest of you will understand why the misinformation is misinformation. If the iPad was available the day it came out, I would have one, and I would be angry at myself. This hype machine Dan is part of is quite dangerous. Dan himself is saying things that are not true. I am not sure if he knows/understands what he is saying, because if he does, that makes him a liar, not just misinformed dumb fark.

  • enzos

    Chuck-o,
    As in Stairway to Heaven sometimes words have two meanings… to go with “revolutionary”, I took “magical” to mean “beautiful or delightful in such a way as to seem removed from everyday life” (Oxf.).. as in a paradigm shift in interface design. Which isn’t all that silly a claim.

    Enz

  • miloh

    @ulicar — “OS is a layer that sits on top of the hardware and provides a simplified interface for manipulating the hardware.”

    This definition isn’t as specific as you think. What constitutes “a simplified interface?” Do you even understand what an interface is?

    Also, I noticed you evaded the question about where exactly people claimed, “cocoa OS X applications can run on iPhone.” I realize I used the term iPad instead of iPhone — that was my error — but the question is the same. Where did anybody say this?

  • ulicar

    Again, as anything in IT the definition of interface is quite precise and goes something like: Interface is a contract.

    Simplified interface means simplified contract. Instead of accessing every possible option in hardware manipulation, i offer you a simplified contract which I will fulfill. If you want to do anything else, that I do not offered in my contract, you are free to do, but not via OS and I am not responsible if while doing that something stupid happens.

    To cite myself “Many times in this discussion somebody like stormj claimed that all naysayers are against iPhone OS because it cannot run (ancient technology) carbon based applications among others. Actually Dan did that as well. Claiming that is actually a lie by omission, because it cannot run cocoa applications either, unless they were made specifically for the device.”

  • bartfat

    @ulicar
    It wasn’t what you said that made you look like a troll, it was simply how you presented it… by giving examples without much proof. Yes, I think the iPad has limited value, I don’t think even Dan would disagree. But obviously it will appeal to certain users… casual users that simply browse the web and do word processing and THAT’s IT. So I don’t think anyone is planning on replacing their Macbook Pro or anything with the iPad. The thing with Dan is that sometimes he tends to be a bit blunt at times and a lot of times that rubs people the wrong way because it fails to describe the complete picture. Anyway, I did know when I posted that post that FUD means fear-uncertainty-doubt. But once again I was blunt, and didn’t take into account ALL your posts, just a few. The thing with some of your posts is that they made points that were just clearly wrong… I don’t know if you heard it elsewhere or made them up yourself, but if you searched for, say, the Apple iPad release date, you would find that Steve Jobs said it would be coming in April (sorry I was wrong with end of March in my earlier post, but I didn’t remember the exact month, just the general timeframe).

    So the point here is that the iPad was under-delivered only because power users like me and you don’t care for the iPad because it’s limited in what it can do and have faulty expectations based on rumors beforehand. But limited value didn’t stop people from buying the iPhone when it was on 2G and no third-party applications and a $600 phone in 2007. So to say it will be a failure is a bit premature. That’s my point. We just don’t know how it will do, but my guess is that tech geeks like us that would like more functionality are in the minority of the population, despite everything we’ve heard on the radio, TV, and internet. That’s not to say it might be a failure… it very well could like the Newton. But it has a fair chance of succeeding where other tablet PCs have largely failed.

  • John E

    browse the web and word processing and that’s it? not watch lots of movies/videos? not show them and photos to your pals and family? not watch any channel (but premium) real time TV anywhere with SlingPlayer? not play all kinds of games? that’s all the stuff i do a lot now that just needs a bigger screen to be a lot better. i’ll enjoy e-magazines too (not much of book reader). and that’s just my list, not everyone’s. oh, plus email and such. and Skype. you live under a rock?

    you know, in my eyes the “casual users” are the real thing and the techies are the fringe. a very self-absorbed fringe. hobbyists like me, kinda in-between.

    my utterly un-tech wife has already told me: “i want one.” last time she said that about any “gadget,” it was the Nano in 2005. we know how that turned out …

  • miloh

    @ulicar — I didn’t think so. An interface is the boundary between two or more interacting elements. What you described is a particular type of interface. That said, in the context of operating systems, what are the precise elements involved and where exactly is the boundary between them?

    Oh, and still waiting for you to point out where it was said that cocoa apps can run on the iPhone. To refresh your memory, you said this:

    “All of you who claim cocoa OS X applications can run on iPhone are liars. It is as simple as that.”

  • ulicar

    No, what I described is an IT interface. Any IT interface. UI is, simply put a contract between OS and you that if you perform an operation in the windowing manager, os will respond. It is a contract, not a boundary. Cardboard box would be a boundary, if your computer was in it.

  • miloh

    @ulicar — You’re really good at reciting textbooks, because that’s exactly what they say too. But it’s obvious that while you know the words, you don’t really comprehend the concepts involved. I highly recommend that before you continue this discussion any further you take some time to study up, because quite honestly you’re coming across as somebody fresh out of school with only entry-level knowledge. I’ll be more than happy to resume discussion with you once you can demonstrate otherwise.

  • FightTheFuture

    daniel, these videos are quite good. as much as i enjoy your writing, the talking head is refreshing and entertaining.

    i wanted to say something that i’ve noticed on engadget. for years now, their writers have become more and more snarky towards apple products, while barely reviewing competing products unless it’s a supposed iPhone/iPod or MacBook killer.

    their readers have leached onto that attitude and have become even more cynical toward any apple news. it’s as if the diggbots realized you could use a yahoo pipe to directly link to digg articles without ever seeing one of their comments again. so they jumped on to engadget.

    that may be why engadget turned off the comments for now. they realized readers like me were getting disgusted by the vaporware circle jerk and removed them from their feed reader.

    anyway, i look forward to watching or reading #5!

  • fiverone

    @ulicar,
    Sorry, the iPad is not for you. And that is OK! It’s not meant for you and most of the techies who were disappointed. I for one can see see the potential of the iPad really attracting across different groups that will suit their needs perfectly. By default the apps the come with it make it useful out of the box. The power and ease of use to get on the internet, listen to music, read ebooks and over 140,000 apps already to be used. This is like nothing that ever came before, including the iPhone. So this puts the iPad in a solid foundation to be successful.

    @daniel,
    thanks for another wonderfull and thoughtfull article. I look forward to reading more. I do believe that by next year I will have an iPad (most likly for my wife). When my wife looks at what she does most of the time, she finds that the iPad really is all she needs.

  • ulicar

    Don’t worry about my knowledge :) I have both teoretical and practical knowledge to run circles around you :)

    The problem is that you do not get, IT is not vague, but very precise. What you are saying does not make any sense in IT world. We deal with precise words, not fiction. When I say interface, any it proffeaional will know what I mean. When I say factory, it professional will ask “which one” and they will not expect “car factory” as the answer. We are precise.

  • miloh

    Thank you. You have responded exactly as I expected.

    You seem to have overlooked some things. You don’t know me. You don’t even know my name. So you definitely don’t know anything about my background, my credentials, my skills, or my knowledge. For all you know, I wrote the material you’re parroting. But here’s the kicker: I never claimed any of this about you. In fact, I never even said you were necessarily wrong in your definition. What I did say was that your understanding of the term was in fact a subset of a more general concept. But you weren’t interested in possibly learning something new. You were interested in being right.

    What you have done here is to demonstrate that you don’t care what others have to say. You think what you think and nothing is going to change that. That’s fine, but it means talking to you is futile.

    Have a nice life. :)

  • fring

    @miloh, good try but the pedantic tone thro’ all ulicar’s posts is un-movable – ‘I am right whatever you say’. I see it as yet another example of the running scared reactionary outpouring of a rabbit in the headlights scenario – rely on what you know. IT doesn’t like disruptive technology, period.
    I’m now retiring from the IT support workplace with the fervent hope that the old desktop metaphor is finally about to change. It is and was always unsustainable for the majority of users. I believe Apple have taken an enormous stride with the iPad and ‘abstraction’ as the new metaphor.
    Funny thing is, that no-one, with the possible exception of Apple users, who I find generally more open, liberal and informed, seems to grok what is about to happen. It’s as though they are willing Apple to succeed by default in the short term, then steal back the market once the changes are in place. Why they can’t see that Apple will take their lunch as well as the chair they are watching from is… well… stupid +.

  • enzos

    Miloh,
    Well put! There’s always a “point maker” (but at least Ulicar sprinkles them with smileys)

    Enz

    Life’s too short for bad wine

  • John E

    Hey, the RDM comments zones aren’t bad. nothing like the troll-infested threads over at Apple Insider!