I’ve been calmly waiting in the iPad wings (see what I did there?) for all of the iPad hype to slow down before I added my ¢2 to the blahgosphere.
Now that we’ve all had a chance to absorb (I did it again!) a super amount of blue-dyed water information about the iPad, I can skip all of the preliminary information on what it is & such. Call me lazy if you like — I call it outsourcing.
In short, I’d buy one if it were $299.
Apple’s created a really interesting consumer consumption device. There are all sorts of people trying to stretch this thing to fit their productivity-shaped holes, or even their traveling-based needs; they’re wrong. This thing is meant to stay at home and serve you your iTunes media. I use the term iTunes media loosely, covering the music, video, books and apps that you store in iTunes. If it ain’t iTunes compatible, Mr. Jobs doesn’t want it on your iPad.
Don’t get me wrong. I don’t blame Apple for wanting to control your experience. I actually applaud them for offering such a completely closed and pleasant experience. The trouble is that they unflinchingly serve their target audience and happily turn away any outsiders. If you’re looking to do something the non-Apple way, Apple would rather you try a different platform.
Plain & simple, right?
Does that sound arrogant? Yes. Is that bad? Not really.
Apple narrowly defines what a device does; naysayers point out what it doesn’t.
Do you want usb ports? Go somewhere else. Camera? Flash? Multitasking? Open app store? You get the point. Steve Jobs’ maniacal attention to detail will not be ruined by loose ends. If that bugs you, this isn’t for you.
Me? I want one. iPad 2.0 will work nicely. Or a cheaper 1.0.