| 
|
Beyond the Apple IPadSaturday, April 03, 2010 at 06:46 AM EDT
I was just interviewed for a BBC television
feature that will run around the same time the iPad is launched. I’ll be
a talking head, basically. For what it’s worth, here’s what I
provided as background for where I’d be coming from in the interview:
- The iPad will arrive in the market with an advantage no other completely
new computing device for the mass market has ever enjoyed: the ability to run
a
100,000-app portfolio that’s already developed, in this case for the
iPhone. Unless the iPad is an outright lemon, this alone should assure its
success.
- The iPad will launch a category within which it will be far from the only
player. Apple’s feudal market-control methods (all developers and
customers are trapped within its walled garden) will encourage competitors
that
lack the same limitations. We should expect other hardware companies to launch
pads running on open source operating systems, especially Android and Symbian. (Disclosure: I consult Symbian.)
These can support much larger markets than Apple’s closed and private
platforms alone will allow.
- The first versions of unique hardware designs tend to be imperfect and get
old fast. Such was the case with the first iPods and iPhones, and will surely
be the case with the first iPads as well. The ones being introduced next week
will seem antique one year from now.
- Warning to competitors: copying Apple is always a bad idea. The company is
an example only of itself. There is only
one Steve Jobs, and nobody else can do what he does. Fortunately, he only
does what he can control. The rest of the market will be out of his control,
and it will be a lot bigger than what fits inside Apple’s beautiful
garden.
I covered some of that, and added a few things, which I’ll enlarge
with a quick brain dump:
- The iPad brings to market a whole new form factor that has a number of
major use advantages over smartphones, laptops and netbooks, the largest of
which is this: it fits in a purse or any small bag — where it
doesn’t act just like any of those other devices. (Aside from
running all those iPhone apps.) It’s easy and welcoming to use —
and its uses are not subordinated, by form, to computing or telephony.
It’s an accessory to your own intentions. This is an advantage
that gets lost amidst all the talk about how it’s little more than a new
display system for “content.”
- My own fantasy for tablets is interactivity with the everyday world. Take
retailing for example. Let’s say you syndicate your shopping list, but
only to trusted retailers, perhaps through a fourth
party
(one that works to carry out your intentions, rather than
sellers’ — though it can help you engage with them). You go into
Target and it gives you a map of the store, where the goods you want are, and
what’s in stock, what’s not, and how to get what’s mising, if
they’re in a position to help you with that. You can turn their
promotions on or off, and you can choose, using your own personal terms of
service, what data to share with them, what data not to, and conditions of
that
data’s use. Then you can go to Costco, the tire store, and the university
library and do the same. I know it’s hard to imagine a world in which
customers don’t have to belong to loyalty programs and submit to coercive
and opaque terms of data use, but it will happen, and it has a much
better chance of happening faster if customers are independent and have their
own tools for engagement. Which are being built. Check out what
Phil Windley says here about one approach.
- Apple works vertically. Android, Symbian, Linux and other open OSes, with
the open hardware they support, work horizonally. There is a limit to how high
Apple can build its walled garden, nice as it will surely be. There is no
limit
to how wide everybody else can make the rest of the marketplace. For help
imagining this, see Dave Winer’s iPad
as
a Coral Reef.
- How big publishers (New York Times, Wall Street Journal, the New Yorker,
Condé Nast, the Book People) use
the iPad as a hand-held newsstand (where, as with real-world newsstands,
you have to pay for the goods) — and how the TV and movie people use the
iPad as a replacement for their old distribution systems (also for pay) are
Very Big Deals. But not as big a deal as how the rest of us use it. Have you
thought about how you’ll blog, or whatever comes next, on an iPad? Or on
any tablet? Does it only have to be in a browser? What about using a tablet as
a production device, and not just an instrument of consumption? I don’t
think Apple has put much thought into this, but others will, outside
Apple’s walled garden. You should too. That’s because we’re
at a juncture here. A fork in the road. Do we want the Internet to be
broadcasting 2.0 — run by a few content companies and their allied
distributors? Or do we want it to be the wide open marketplace it was meant to
be in the first place, and is good for everybody? (This is where you should
pause and read what
Cory Doctorow and Dave
Winer say about it.)
- We’re going to see a huge strain on the mobile data system as iPads
and other tablets flood the world. Here too it will matter whether the mobile
phone companies want to be a rising tide that lifts all boats, or just
conduits
for their broadcasting and content production partners. (Or worse, old
fashioned phone companies, treating and billing data in the same awful ways
they bill voice.) There’s more money in the former than the latter, but
the latter are their easy pickings. It’ll be interesting to see where
this goes.
I also deal with all this in a longer post that will go up elsewhere.
I’ll point to it here when it comes up.
This article originally appeared on Doc Searls Weblog. |