Those who read my blog know that I’m not an Apple hater. Even with a company name like “GetMorePC,” I was trained on an Apple Power PC back in the 90s by my grandmother, Velma Hendrix. She showed me how to edit documents, create documents, make slideshow and videos, back before I ever really got into PCs, much less PC repair. I regularly repair macs, replacing hard drives and reloading software with the best of them. I have the latest copy of the Apple Operating System, Snow Leopard, and I know how to use it. I even own an iPhone. But there is one new piece of Apple technology that I’m not too terribly fond of because of its lack of a keyboard, incompatibility with iPhone apps, and lame 2nd generation upgrades: The Apple iPad.
Lets start with my experience. I bought an iPad last year when they were still the newest tablet out. I liked the tablet, don’t get me wrong, but I made the mistake of getting the Wi-Fi only model, instead of the 3G. Nothing is more useless and disconnected than an iPad off the Internet. Most of the apps I used were web apps in glorified iOS makeup, so if you go off the internet, prepare for it not to work much. About all I could do was create a document or spreadsheet. Another thing that held me back from my full potential while using it was its onscreen keyboard. I could never get it typing fast like I would a laptop’s keyboard, which made me usually pass over the device if I wanted to do any serious document creating or craft a well-written response to an email. The on-screen keyboard just made me cringe and not even want to use it. I know you can use a Bluetooth keyboard with it, but that’s not a very portable tablet is it? The on-screen keyboard made me feel like I was using a computer with one hand tied behind my back. In the words of Robbie Queener, I could consume media great, but I had a hard time producing media. This might have changed since the release of iMovie and Garageband for iOS, but that has yet to been seen.
Another thing that busted my bubble was the incompatibility with iPhone apps. Now before you Apple fanboys start railing on me, I know you can run an iPhone app on the iPad. This is how it runs, for those of you without an iPad: It runs in a little, tiny, shrunken-down box in the middle of the screen. The box is about what an iPhone would look like if you set it down on the middle of the iPad, if you can imagine that. Its tiny, which isn’t exactly the experience you want from your shiny new tablet computer. Granted, you can expand it to 2X, but then it gets all pixelated and looks like you’re holding a magnify to an iPhone. Also, you don’t get to use the iPad’s keyboard on iPhone apps, but instead you get the little tiny iPhone keyboard, or twice that if you 2X it. That was a real bummer.
Now let me go off on the iPad 2, or the iPad 1.5 as it should be called. First off, they had camera technology when the first iPad came out. Its almost like Apple knew (NO?) they were going to come out with an iPad 2 and purposefully gimped it to screw early adopters, much like they do annually. It used to be the fact that you could buy a piece of Apple technology and have it for 10 years or so. Sure it needed to be maintained and probably upgraded or repaired, but it would still be great. Now Apple has gotten into this one year cycle of re-releasing their new products with a few new bells and whistles and people eat it up! Sorry for the rant, but I’ve been keeping that one bottled up for some time now.
Like I was saying, they had camera technology in the 1800s, for the love of cheese, so they could have put a camera on the iPad 1, but they didn’t. With iPad 2, they didn’t increase the screen resolution, they just made it a little skinnier. Supposedly the battery lasts longer, but they probably just changed the screen to go to sleep in 30 seconds instead of 2 minutes and called it “Genius.” I assure you, this was not the direction I saw this blog post going in, but now I’m into it and I’m feeling good about it. Apple put a new chip in the iPad 2 to make it faster, but nobody complained that the iPad 1 was slow. Besides, Apple has never been a company to impress buyers with its technical specifications; they’ve always left that to the PC owners. Even the cameras they put on the iPad 2 are pretty low resolution cameras, like 1 megapixel for the forward-facing camera. One megapixel. They had one megapixel cameras in the 80s, so again it’s like Apple is holding out on its customers so it can sell them an iPad 3 in a couple of months.
But I’m obviously the lone critic on this stuff. Apple’s stock is way up for this quarter. I sold my iPad to someone who wanted one. I never used it and it sat in the car most of the time. I felt that it was too expensive of a piece of equipment not to use, so I sold it. The tablet I want is a tiny little PC tablet, that will run Quickbooks and Outlook and every other piece of software I use regularly. I don’t want a computer that I’ve got to buy all new software for. I want a PC tablet. This year, 2011, is supposed to be the year of the tablet, but so far, I’m not seeing it. There have been some lack-lustre Google Android tablets come out, but none of them have really impressed the reviewers and some of them are downright broken. Blackberry’s tablet doesn’t even really function without a Blackberry hooked up to it, so they’re obviously going down the wrong road.
Our only hope will be the savior of the past to return. Some small asian manufacturer needs to come out with a fully-functional, PC tablet for an affordable price that runs any software or game. NVidia is experimenting with smaller chips for graphics processing and AMD has started trying to merge its CPUs with its GPUs, promising power savings and graphical-horsepower in a small form factor. Until this happens, the day of the tablet will only be tomorrow. As for now, we’ll have to settle for Apple’s iPad 2, with its dinky camera, onscreen keyboard and App store.
Found your site on yahoo today and really liked it.. I bookmarked it and will be back to check it out some more later.
@Daniel Buchanan:
>”I think we’re getting close to a point where gaming can be done on a mobile platform with the same amount of awe as on a computer platform.”
This appears to be true, until you consider that games will continue to push the envelope with regard to their hardware requirements. Certainly better hardware can be used in tablets, but none of them are going to compete with the high-end graphics cards we see on the market now, and I don’t think this is going to change in the next five years. Further, miniaturization has always had drawbacks in terms of power. As smaller hardware gets more powerful, so will the desktop hardware. The game developers will attempt to take advantage of the power on the desktop because that’s where they can really push the envelope. They may have versions of their games that run well on ultra-mobile devices (and I really hope that the MMORPG developers do), but the experience won’t be exactly the same as on the desktop. I’m never the one to say “never”, because I think just about everyone in history who has with regard to technology has been proven wrong and made to look like a fool, but I will say “not in the short term”. I’m still waiting for my flying car. 😉
>”The implication of your first paragraph is that smaller devices are necessarily weaker, which I disagree with optimistically based on the other tech blogs I read. Lets not just set a low standard and be happy with it; lets improve and innovate and continue to do so ad infinitum.”
For me, it’s definitely not about setting low standards and being happy with them, but I do think we need to be realistic. Optimism is great, but there will always be a tradeoff when we miniaturize things. History has always proven this to be true. Yes, the smaller, more portable hardware has always gotten more powerful, but it did not do so in a vacuum. The desktop (and mainframe) hardware also increased in power, along with the applications that use those platforms. Now, certainly there are some apps that eventually hit the limit of the power that they need. We are already at the point where we can run many of the apps on an iPad that were once only possible on desktop hardware, but games, for example, will always push the envelope and increase their requirements based on the higher end hardware that’s available. Gaming is always at on the cutting edge because ever game released is a demo of what its developer can do.
>”You can say that an internet tablet being obsolete when offline is obvious, however I choose to disagree. Many people have no experience with computers, much less mobile devices and tablets, and may not understand the subtle differences between 3G and Wi-Fi internet connectivity. By pointing out my “mistake,” if calling avoiding another AT&T monthly charge and a low bandwidth capped connection can be called a mistake, I have pointed out an obvious shortcoming of the internet tablet’s requirement: it doesn’t work without internet.”
Fair point, but the same is true for any computing device that is purchased today. Quite frankly, my Mac Pro is nearly useless for the things I most use it for if it doesn’t have an Internet connection. I do think it’s perfectly obvious that, if an app requires an Internet connection, it’s not going to run on hardware that doesn’t have that connection. Not all apps require an Internet connection, however, but those that do are mostly obvious, aren’ they? If I want to use Alien Blue (a Reddit.com client), I need an Internet connection. Apps that are a front end to a Web site or a Web-based service will require an Internet connection. If I want to play Angry Birds, I do not need to be connected.
To your point about the subtle differences between WiFi and 3G, fair enough, but, again, this isn’t a problem with tablets alone. This is the case with all computing hardware these days. The fact that some people may not understand the difference between 3G (always-on Internet) and WiFi (sometimes-on Internet, if you’re within range) is not an issue with the device, it’s an issue with consumer education, so it shouldn’t be counted against any tablet, iPad or otherwise.
>”Why can’t we have a holographic keyboard… [or] voice recognition?”
Regarding voice recognition, that’s a fair point. Dragon Dictation exists, however, and it’s useful if one is writing an essay or blog entry. I think the main problems with voice recognition, and the reason I’d still choose an on-screen keyboard over it, are:
1. It only works in a quiet room. I use my iPad while watching TV. People listen to music when they write.
2. People may be uncomfortable speaking their thoughts out loud with others around (I know that this makes me uncomfortable). There are often others around me.
3. People may not want to disturb others who are around them.
4. It’s not as great as people often think it will be. Voice recognition is good if you know exactly what you want to say and if the words flow out of you quickly and without pauses (which usually produce periods or commas). If you don’t need to change anything that you’ve said, voice recognition is great. Most people, however, revise things as they type. That breaks the train of thought if they have to talk to the machine and tell it to “go back” and make changes. The brain is not tripped up as easy when a backspace key is used because speaking words is not required to move the cursor, delete words, etc. It’s also a lot faster to edit things with a keyboard.
5. Voice recognition still requires proofreading and corrections. Going back over a 500 word document and making changes is simply easier with a keyboard.
As for holo keyboards, they have one major drawback. You have to use your device on a flat surface. At that point, why not use a laptop or a tablet with a dock or a Bluetooth keyboard? I often carry my iPad around. I often use it in the bathroom. I often use it on my couch. Looking at my desk right now, with multiple displays, two keyboards, and a laptop, I don’t have enough space to spare for the Bluetooth keyboard that I purchased for use with my iPad, let alone what a full size holo keyboard would probably require (and I have a large desk). As an option that I could use when I want to use it, sure, I’ll take a holo keyboard, but it won’t get a lot of use.
>”Why can’t we have a slider keyboard?”
Increased size and weight of the device. More moving parts. It’s a matter of what sort of device you want. I actually prefer the way that Apple sees the world. I want a smaller device. As small as possible, without giving up too much power, battery life or screen size. That means thin. The device would need to be twice as thick if a slider keyboard were added (unless we want a very thin and easily breakable plastic — to compensate for added weight — keyboard). There are going to be devices (running Android) that will have slider keyboards. They won’t be for me. I will bet my next paycheck that we will see them be twice the thickness (at least) of the iPad. That’s moving in the wrong direction.
Side note: I actually like the iOS keyboard. I find the typing correction to be excellent about 90% of the time (saving me from lots of mistakes) and I can type rather fast on it (whether on the iPhone or iPad). I estimate that I can type at about 60% of the speed on an iPad in landscape orientation that I can using a physical keyboard. That’s good enough for most tasks, and I use a Bluetooth keyboard when I need it. I understand that a software keyboard is not for everyone but I think I have rather average size hands and fingers.
>”Apple has always catered to creative designers with its other devices. It’s time the iPad also rises to that standard.”
I think Apple has done this with iOS. Which developers were creating truly mobile applications that received rave reviews and design awards before iOS came along? I’d never seen mobile apps on other platforms that were as beautiful as those that I’ve seen on iOS. I think a lot of this has to do with Xcode, Cocoa and standard Apple sets in terms of user interface design. iOS has unleashed the creativity of countless indie developers and those developers are happy to have the platform.
Let’s also keep in mind that we are just over a year into the “new” tablet market (if we can even say that there was a market before the iPad hit the scene). The platform is still evolving and, with a little competition from Android, I think we’re going to see Apple continue to innovate. I don’t say this as a fanboy. I say this because history has proven it. Who was really talking about smartphones to the degree that they are now before the iPhone? Apple didn’t invent the smartphone, but they made it better. There’s a reason that every other manufacturer is trying to copy them. Tablets were DOA prior to the iPad’s release last year. The market was literally dead. Now one actually exists and Apple deserves all the credit for that because (1) it was the only game in town for a year and it sold more units than anyone had predicted and (2) the iPad competitors that exist now are barely selling their products. Again, everyone is copying Apple. I know this: If you bet on Apple in the 21st century (the 90s weren’t so great for them), you’re likely to come out on top more often than not. I look at the iPad and I’m excited about the future, even if it isn’t perfect right now.
From the last paragraph:
The author must first remember what the hardware of tablets can and cannot do. “Any software or game”? For what platform? OS X? Windows? As far as gaming, are we talking high-end games? That’s just not going to happen, even if the device is running full-blown Windows or OS X. Small hardware has limitations and it always will. It will never be as powerful as a desktop that can run the latest high-end game with high frame rates and no lag. The author seems to want one of the Windows tablets that attempted to make a splash in first few years of this century, but no one wanted those because they were terrible. Dumping a full OS into a tablet simply doesn’t work. The OS must be designed to work with a smaller form factor, a touch screen and more limited hardware in order to keep the device ultra-portable and responsive.
The author also complains that he made the mistake of buying the WiFi-only iPad. Well, yes, that model is only going to be useful if you’ve always got a WiFi connection. I have one and I love it because I am never far from WiFi or a 3G connection that I can jump onto via a portable hotspot. This isn’t really a valid complaint, because a tablet that isn’t connected to the Internet is obviously not going to access the content of apps that are driven by their connection to the Internet.
As far as the keyboard, that issue is going to exist for every tablet on the market, and it existed for every slate tablet that was released earlier last decade that ran Windows (there were tablet-notebook hybrids with screens that swiveled, but they were huge and heavy). If the author is unwilling to use an external keyboard, and doesn’t want a very heavy device, and doesn’t want to use the on-screen keyboard, he’s not in the target market for a tablet. I’m not sure that there is any way around this, unfortunately. The tablet is meant to be ultra-portable, so it necessarily needs to shed the things that make is heavy.
Complaints about the lack of cameras on the first iPad and the terrible cameras in the iPad 2 are fair game, of course, but one must remember that the rear camera on the iPad 2 is not designed to shoot still photos (who would even want to do this when every smartphone these days has a “good enough” camera?). That rear camera was meant to shoot video, and it’s not absolutely terrible for that, if the reviews I’ve read, and the video I’ve seen, is any indication. The front-facing camera could have been better, for sure, but it’s good enough for video conferencing (it’s intended purpose). I’m not making excuses here. The cameras in the iPad 2 should have been better. The author, however, seems to dislike tablets themselves, as evidenced by his other general complaints, and complains about specific iPad features because he happened to own an iPad.
As far as the complaint about iPhone apps not being supported on the iPad, the author rightly points out that they are supported, provided that the app developers make them universal (meaning that the same app looks and behaves differently on the iPhone and iPad). Well, that’s the developer’s prerogative, as it should be. If they spend a good deal of time customizing an iPhone app for use on a larger tablet display in order to take advantage of that display, it’s their right to charge separately for that app. At least the iPad can run iPhone apps that are not universal. Yes, as the author points out, non-universal apps designed for the iPhone run as a “tiny, shrunken-down box in the middle of the screen”, but how else does the author propose that Apple handle this? Apps designed by their developers to take advantage of an iPhone’s screen size, that have not been updated to provide a different experience on the iPad, can only be run as is on the iPad. It’s as simple as that. At least we can do that much. The author’s complaint is with the developers, not the device or with Apple. What’s Apple to do, force developers to make all their apps universal? That’s unreasonable.
As for me, I love my iPad. It’s a different experience than a desktop or a notebook, but that’s what I love about it. I can use it while sitting on my couch or moving around my house without lugging around a heavy laptop. It’s a success because there is a market for this. The author may not be included in that market, and that’s fair enough, but the market exists and it’s huge.
Dennis thank you for your extensive review of my blog post. I can tell you have thought about the various points I tried to make and have found valid objections. For this I am grateful! Now I want to respond, since this is a blog and I can do that.
First off, I think we’re getting close to a point where gaming can be done on a mobile platform with the same amount of awe as on a computer platform. As I mentioned, the NVidia Tegra and the AMD Fusion both offer to bring greater graphics capabilities to a smaller, perhaps more mobile-oriented chip. Small hardware has limitations, but we’re surpassing limitations every day all the time, as is evident in the recent resurgence of mobile hardware catching up to the desktop and laptop platforms.
I’ll give you that the first windows tablets were terrible and I’m not locked into that platform. It just happens to be the platform that the other 90% of computer users who don’t use Macs happen to use, so I hope it can be ported to a mobile, easy-to-carry package. The implication of your first paragraph is that smaller devices are necessarily weaker, which I disagree with optimistically based on the other tech blogs I read. Lets not just set a low standard and be happy with it; lets improve and innovate and continue to do so ad infinitum.
You can say that an internet tablet being obsolete when offline is obvious, however I choose to disagree. Many people have no experience with computers, much less mobile devices and tablets, and may not understand the subtle differences between 3G and Wi-Fi internet connectivity. By pointing out my “mistake,” if calling avoiding another AT&T monthly charge and a low bandwidth capped connection can be called a mistake, I have pointed out an obvious shortcoming of the internet tablet’s requirement: it doesn’t work without internet.
The keyboard issue is another case where innovation will soon prevail. Why do we have to type with an on-screen keyboard? Why can’t we have a holographic keyboard, complete with all 104 keys, not a slimmed down qwerty typewriter that hides punctuation marks and other useful symbols behind a shift key or a symbols key? Why can’t we have voice recognition? Why can’t we have a slider keyboard with a little more tactile grab-ability, which I like? If this is going to be a truly post-pc device, we’re going to need an updated input method as well. My main complaint was the lack of sustainability with the keyboard. After short usage, I got frustrated and resorted to a full keyboard on a computer for longer emails and documents. I found myself become a virtual hermit, due only to my inability to type long strings of text on the keyboard, and yearned for the lost gregariousness that I once had at a keyboard. If I had one now, I would definitely have a bluetooth keyboard. Problem solved.
You’re with me on the video. I think tablets are going to be huge. I’m just not satisfied with what’s out there now and look to a future with something better.
The iPhone app compatibility raises another point. You see, with real computers, I’m allowed to set the resolution of the screen, not just use the default resolution set by the manufacturer. Also, my applications on my computer scale to the resolution of my screen quite easily, making full use of display real estate. I realize the smaller iPhone display won’t fit on the larger iPad, but this was another letdown I experienced when I had my iPad, so I felt it fitting to let the cat out of the bag for everyone else, before they wasted $500 bucks to find out for themselves. That’s what you do in an expository piece: expose.
I really did like my iPad when I had it. I just felt it was too limiting of a computer to fully harness a person’s creativity. Apple has always catered to creative designers with its other devices. It’s time the iPad also rises to that standard.
Yes, Apple is definitely hoarding new technology, only to meter it out a little at a time in the newest versions of their hardware. It makes me want to be on the trailing edge of technology instead of the leading edge. Let someone else pay a premium for the newest gadget and I’m content to get it a year later for half the price.