“Last Wednesday we could see as Apple presented their hyped-up much rumoured and awaited tabled, something that had created such an expectancy. However, it was such great this level of anticipation that the presentation was inevitable an anticlimax, as the tech world so frequently used the analogy of an over-sized iPod Touch that, what Steve Jobs essentially presented to us was a large iPod Touch.” – As stated in the Spanish blog Microsiervos.

But it’s not all about the expectation. Jobs could have made a great speech anyway, no matter the product. The actual product targets a new market segment. The product is actually great, it’s just what Jobs said, and how he said it, which disappoints me.

This part 1 of the original keynote Steve Jobs gave in 2007 where he presented a “revolutionary” device, the iPhone:

In that keynote he addressed 3 separate products combined into 1. A phone, a music player and an internet communication device. It was a great speech. He talked about all the different features incorporated into this product that would prove to be one of worldwide success. He gave live examples of the product. He talked like a pro at all times. He was delivering a new product, and he knew just how to get out there.

A week ago Steve Jobs gave a keynote in which he unveils the iPad. This is the presentation he gave:

So I would like to address parts of his speech independently, to be able to critically analise what he said. After each sentence I will give my own opinion, which by no means represents the media’s view, nor the general public’s view.

• It’s very thin - Yes, that seems to be the general concept these days. Isn’t the iPod Touch also thin?
• And you can change the background screen, the home screen, to personalise it any way you want. - If it couldn’t do that it would be a disgrace of a tablet.
• You can browse the web with it. – And shouldn’t it be able to? I mean, the iPod and iPhone can.
• It is the best browsing experience you’ve ever had. – Based on the same system built for the iPhone. If it didn’t incorporate this technology what kind of a tablet would it be?
• And you can turn an iPad any way you want, up, down, sideways. It automatically adjusts. – Yeah, motion sensors. There’s no point in making them sound “new”.
• Right there holding the internet in your hands. - Uhh?

The problem is that he presented these points as if they were brand new. When he gave the iPhone speech it was impressive, he demonstrated everything real-time, and made it all seem “cool”. Addressing the same issues the same way with just an oversized iPod is not cool.

He should have focused less on the fact that it has these standard features that the iPhone and iPod Touch already have, and more on the fact that with 3rd party add-ons, OS improvements, application and OS extensibility the tablet might make a great gadget. For what? For collaborative meetings, for adding extensibility (drawing pad anyone?) to PCs and Macs.

It is also an interesting Kindle competitor. Great for working in tight spaces which makes it good versus Netbooks. Frankly I think it is a good gadget. It would be better if it had an actual OS as an alternative, or an extensible version of the OS (apart from Apps), however, with a better focus on segmentation this device will be great.

What is your opinion on the speech and the actual device?

No related posts.

It has a nice UI for starters. Full color gama and transparency controls. Allows full zoom in and out using pinch. Has complete range of brush sizes but it lacks a selection of different brush types.

The only negative aspect I can see is that the resolution is too small for professional use, but it. Can be quite fun to pass some time or to develop quick ideas before they vanish.

No related posts.