The Apple iPad - Anand's Analysis
by Anand Lal Shimpi on January 27, 2010 5:00 PM EST- Posted in
- Smartphones
- Mobile
Will it Work...Literally
Today my issue with the iPhone (and netbooks for that matter) is that they are very limited when it comes to productivity. I don’t have a good solution if I need the performance, usability and capabilities of my notebook, but want something lighter to carry around with me. You could always get a CULV notebook or from Apple something like the MacBook Air, but that’s still a notebook. There is no perfect blend of notebook functionality with smartphone portability. If the iPad can achieve that, at least in the same manner that the iPhone did for smartphones, then I will consider it worth the hype.
Achieving that goal requires a delicate balance of the right UI, the right hardware (including ergonomics) and the right functionality.
The UI looks clean and snappy. Apple’s biggest omission here appears to be multitasking support. One of the most frustrating things about using an iPhone is its inability to do two serious tasks at once. Email + Web browsing, Pandora + anything. You get the point. This is perhaps a temporary issue. The iPad runs iPhone OS 3.2 as of today. The next major release of the iPhone OS, version 4.0, is expected to add multitasking support. This could presumably make its way onto the iPad later this year (or early 2011?).
Yeah that looks super comfortable...
The hardware looks good. It remains to be seen whether or not it’s actually comfortable to hold a 1.5 lbs tablet while you type on it. Although Apple has a couple of accessories that look to address that issue:
 |  |
 |  |
The software keyboard looks like it could work well, if it’s combined with the same sort of predictive trickery that the iPhone uses. I’ve been asking for the sort of tablet the Enterprise crew (Star Trek, not the server market) carried around. The iPad’s interface, at least what I’ve seen of it, has the most potential to deliver that sort of experience. The iPad UI could be something that feels like it was made in 2010, not 2002.
The functionality is also a big unknown. When the iPhone first launched its killer apps were the ones that Apple made for it. While the App Store is far more mature now, the iPad will need some key functionality for it to be a productivity device.
Porting iWork ($9.99 per app) to the iPad was necessary. The fact that Apple did this right off the bat indicates that at least someone over there knows that the market for a $500 - $900 toy is slim. But we need more. We need things like Photoshop for the iPad. Dare I say that we even need a port of Microsoft Office?
At CES everyone talked about tablets and eReaders being huge at the show. I saw a lot of neat devices, but nothing I’d want to go out and buy. The iPad is the first one I’ve seen with potential. And much like the iPhone before it, whether you like it or not is irrelevant - it will at least pave the way for other companies to emulate and improve upon the design.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
155 Comments
View All Comments
Mike1111 - Wednesday, January 27, 2010 - link
Why I'm disappointed by the current iteration of the iPad:Display:
- Low resolution (9.7" 1024x768 132ppi), no HD (720p), even lower ppi than iPhone (3.5" 480x320 163ppi), no comparison to Motorola Droid's ppi (3.7" 854x480 265ppi), Nexus One (800x480) or even Kindle DX (9.7" 1200 x 824, 150 ppi)
- No advanced display technology (Pixel Qi etc.)
- No digital TV-Out (Micro-HDMI, Mini DisplayPort etc.)
- For a modern device weird display ratio (4:3), IMHO iPhone's ratio (3:2) would have made more sense
- Glossy
- Plus this most likely means that we won't see a higher resolution screen in this years iPhone (iPad 9.7" with 1024x768 and than just 3 months later an iPhone 3.5" with 800x480 or something like that? No way!).
Storage:
- Only 64GB. Last years iPod touch has already 64GB, iPhone 32GB. I'm sure only a few months after the iPad comes out we'll see 64GB iPhones and 128GB iPod touches.
GPS:
- No GPS in WiFi only model
Sound:
- No stereo speakers (Seriously? On top, just opposite to the bottom one would have been so easy. I mean there's no camera and no telephone speaker up there as in the iPhone, there's got to be room there for a second speaker. I mean there are even tiny dumb phones out there with "decent" stereo speakers, e.g. from Nokia and Samsung).
Battery and Power:
- Only "up to" 10 hours of WiFi surfing (comparable to the iPhone)
Size and weight:
- Bezel too big
- Too thick (0.5"), thicker than iPhone and iPod touch
- Too heavy (1.5 pounds). Engadget already complained about the weight in their hands-on.
Camera:
- No camera, not even a low-resolution front facing one for video conferencing
OS:
- No multitasking, notifications etc.
- Just iPhone OS 3.2? In march/april? So it's unlikely that we will see an update to 4.0 just 3 months later (with the next gen iPhone hardware and OS).
jimhsu - Wednesday, January 27, 2010 - link
10 hours would be a substantial improvement from the iPhone (the 3G/3Gs models at least). I'm lucky if continuous 3G surfing lasts 5 hours (it usually doesn't). Wifi ... maybe 6 hours.Mike1111 - Wednesday, January 27, 2010 - link
Well, officially it's 5 (3G) and 9 hours (WiFi) on the iPhone. So 10 hours via WiFi on the iPad seems comparable.gfxmobile - Wednesday, January 27, 2010 - link
Anad could this possible be the featured SGX 545 "The IP is already proven in silicon in a test chip from Imagination and licensed by a lead partner." from PowerVR website.Does Imagtec PowerVR even have a 45nm core?
The video playback should provide clues to figure out witch version of the PowerVR was used. Though it can be the software that it's crippling it. Since the PowerVR has been demoed on the beagleboard doing full HD decoding.
Apple sucks at giving details. Can't anyone take on of those things apart so we can get some anwsers? GRRRR
Rys - Thursday, January 28, 2010 - link
ImgTec aren't the ones who decide which process technology it's made on. That's up to the licensee and their manufacturing partner for the silicon.There are 45nm PowerVR products in the wild though.
Rindis - Wednesday, January 27, 2010 - link
I think it looks like it has a good chance to do well in the target market, and will do well.Pity I'm not part of that market. ;) What *I* want is something portable that allows blogging/forum commenting on the go. I don't see that working with that form factor, or without a keyboard.
What I want is a netbook. Need to find the money for that. ;)
What I don't get, is why no one's gone the route of turning one of these devices into a phone (software & cell modem + input/output audio port). I mean, sure, it's it's a horrible form factor for just a phone, but if you're going to carry one of these everywhere *anyway*, why not drop the need for the extra device?
kamper - Wednesday, January 27, 2010 - link
Is it true that this thing will be app store only like the iphone and ipod touch? If so, no thanks.jimhsu - Wednesday, January 27, 2010 - link
Honestly, while this offers great entertainment potential, I still can't see this being used at all for productivity.Possible usage cases:
1. Browsing docs/spreadsheets. Works.
2. Creating/editing docs/spreadsheets. Frustrating with documents, near completely horrible with spreadsheets (try entering tables of numbers on that thing).
3. Taking notes. Horrible. Lack of pen input seriously degrades this compared to real tablets. Lack of physical keyboard makes inputting inferior to net/notebooks. Of course, there's also the problem of finding a OneNote equivalent, but "that's a software problem".
4. Running scientific/technical apps (ex. Mathematica, SPSS, CAD/CAM tools) - completely impossible, I assume, with the iPhone OS.
5. Photo/image/movie manipulation. Um... yea.
So ... an entertainment device this is.
Lonyo - Wednesday, January 27, 2010 - link
An entertainment device with a 4:3 screen, which means either stretched content, cropped content, or huge wastes of screen space with blackness.Oh, and very limited outputs (no HD outputs, only VGA up to 1024x768 or composite up to 576p) means no hooking it up to your TV.
So video is out, which leaves web pages and music. Only you probably can't do both at the same time.
AnnonymousCoward - Thursday, January 28, 2010 - link
All very good points.