Apple's iPad

I know it doesn't matter much, but I'm so glad that Apple went with iPad rather than "iSlate." Branding does mean a lot. So, like the rest of the world, I waited for what would be announced and I must say that I'm impressed. Impressed with what's coming in the future and not with what we have today. But can any first generation product be all that you want? There are several deal breakers for me:

• You can't multi-task. So, if I'm writing e-mail, I can't play music at the same time? That better be fixed in the second generation of this product. This is critical.
• There's no Flash support. Why is Apple so against Flash? Maybe they hope that Flash will fade away and the HTML5 experience will replace it?
• No automatic built-in always connected internet. What I thought innovative about the Kindle was Whispernet (by Sprint I believe). You buy the device and can, out of the box, buy books online from it wherever there's coverage. That's nice. Very nice. The original iPad will have Wi-fi and later models will have 3G but, again, you have to pay AT&T a monthly fee and, doesn't AT&T have horrible service? (I can't tell you how many times I've tried to call people on their iPhones and they don't get the call.)

Still, with all of these major points aside, I'm still impressed with the product. I'd love to get my hands on one to play with it. I'm also looking at it as a possible replacement for a writing tool. I believe you can connect an optional keyboard to it and I was thinking of writing stories/novels off of the iPad. Prop it up, connect the keyboard, use Google Docs and write away.

Would I run out tomorrow and spend $499 on the iPad? No. But if the multi-tasking was fixed in the second generation, I might seriously consider picking one up. In looking to the future, it would behoove (nice word) the publishing industry to get behind the iPad and similar devices because paper publishing is slowly fading away. Young readers want touch screens and not newspapers. Imagine being able to play your race car game, write e-mail, post to Facebook, read a book and listen to music all on one device--isn't that what people are already doing now with their iPhones? Wouldn't it make sense for people to have a better experience on a 10" or so screen? I foresee a time in the not so distant future in which many of us are using an iPad like device. Drop the price point a bit, boost the battery life and give it multi-task and I think you have a killer product. Again, time will tell. It always does.

For more iPad goodness, check out several editorial in-depth reviews of the iPad from Engadet for some great reads.

Comments

[rbuccigrossi]

I believe the iPad's "inability" to multitask is the same as the iPhone: it really can, but not for non-Apple developers. With the iPhone, you can play the Apple MP3 player while doing other applications (it will nicely reduce the MP3 volume if an application generates sound, and then restore it). However, you will not be able to IM and Skype at the same time. So they don't even have to update the hardware: just fix the darn operating system (of course they don't consider it broken since it was by desgin)!

[Ron Vitale]

I wonder if Apples decision to have the iPad not have multi-tasking is because they want the device to appear to be extremely fast when running an app. I remember when I first saw an iPhone commercial and I truly thought it had been edited when pulling up an app. It just seemed way too fast for real life. But I was wrong.

Now that the iPad will have its own SDK are you thinking about designing a game app for it? Might be fun to have near 10 to play games on. Multi-touch screen--could be a nice way to fund a college fund! ;)