The iPad is a beautiful piece of kit, following in the Apple tradition of making beautifully designed hardware that also brings with it compelling unique selling points. But with the iPad, has the company got the balance wrong and does the popularity of this latest dreamware really have little to do with the function that the tablet serves?
First out of the box impressions are positive. The unit is every bit as attractive in the flesh as it looks in the advertisements – and feels solid. It is thinner than I had expected, perhaps an illusion created by the attractive bevelling. And once switched on, the brightness and clarity of the screen have me slowly buying into the concept.
I can see myself sat on the sofa at home using it to browse the web (an experience so much more pallatable than browsing on an iPhone or other smartphone – especially when it comes to entering text.) I can also see myself using it to browse YouTube with greater enjoyment (the screen size is more appealing for this than a smaller device) or for watching BBC iPlayer in bed. I love the idea that I would also find myself working with it when in Starbucks. But are any of these things a reality?
After a few days with the device, I find that I am rarely finding a use for it. The iPhone in my pocket is more mobile (in every sense of the word) and fulfils all my newsreading needs readily. When on the sofa, I’m finding that I’m drawn either to my iPhone or a “real” computer with a decent keyboard; I find the iPad awkward to hold and use at the same time – especially for more than a minute or so. But put it flat on a table and typing while viewing the screen seems clumsy – everything is at the wrong angle. (Typing on the virtual keyboard is impressive though – my four-finger typing is almost as quick as on a real keyboard – but it’s not as comfortable or natural as its non-virtual counterpart.)
Watching video on it lives up to expectations – but I soon realise that YouTube and iPlayer don’t have the appeal of Sky+ in the lounge. On the go, I can certainly see the appeal of catching episodes of Damages or Spiral on the tube an appealing prospect; my iPhone fulfils that function currently but the extra screen real estate (and lack of a keyboard that an ultraportable or netbook would bring with it) is certainly attractive.
Starbucks? When do I sit and work in Starbucks? No. It doesn’t and won’t ever happen. But even if the advertising images of such behaviour really do fit reality for some people, what would users do on the device? Respond to emails and do web-based research? Perhaps.
But this just brings me to the same conclusion that myriad other bloggers and critics have reached long before now – the iPad is neither one thing nor the other. It is not as mobile as a smartphone (in fact, it is no more portable than a laptop by the time you’ve added the necessary casing to protect the device) and it is not as practical as a laptop (with proper keyboard and correctly-angled screen.)
And then there’s the cost. Let me recommend instead that you get an iPhone (now from free on a pretty cheap tarriff) and take advantage of all the attractive goodness that brings, as well as the fantastic array of apps. And let me recommend you buy a small laptop – I’d suggest something like the Lenovo Touchpad X100e – with an 11.6″ HD screen, full size keyboard, much-better-than-a-netbook processor and graphics card, built-in wifi and 3G, excellent (and highly attractive) build – and all for around £450. Erm, cheaper than an iPad but offering so much more (including the ability to play Flash.) This route will also insure you against the impending envy (and wallet-bashing insult-to-injury) that will come when Apple soon bring out the next generation iPad – slightly more expensive, but sleeker and with more memory/storage/pixels (delete as applicable) – making your new toy seem ever so last-season.
Now I’m off to research which model of iPhone 4 to invest in…