
What is pretty clear to me, despite the demonstration of the iPad as an artist’s canvas, is that this is a device which is geared towards reasonably passive consumption of products and services.
Looking at photos on the iPad seems to be a gorgeous experience, but getting them onto the device is still no better than syncing to iTunes or transferring them from your camera; the experience you can already get with an iPod or iPhone. I can also watch high quality video, but there’s no camera to turn that idea around - putting me into a still image or video on somebody else’s iPad. This seems to me like a missed opportunity for really interesting inter-personal engagement on a tactile, mobile device.
Multitouch interfaces are great for rotating, swiping, scrolling, sorting, moving, picking, placing - but not so hot at fine control of say, a keyboard. I can’t help but think that there’s a fundamental value to the physicality of a keyboard that you can’t replicate on a smooth surface, though Apple have made good progress with the iPhone, and no doubt learned a lot.
The operating system, like the iPhone, isn’t too friendly towards me finding my own software to install and use unless I do it through the iTunes Store. This obviously makes sense for Apple from a business perspective, but it is limiting.
So, when I look at the capabilities of the iPad I can’t help but think that the balance between me being able to create artefacts, capture myself and document my surroundings is out of kilter with my ability to manipulate and consume things I create or buy elsewhere. On a phone I think this is okay but when you get into a larger, more expensive, more capable machine this looks more like a business choice rather than a design constraint. I’m not saying Apple are a million miles away, but it all just feels a bit overbearing.
No company goes to greater lengths to limit access to its internal thought processes and to choreograph its public persona - Apple have both of these competencies down to a fine art. Control seems to be at the heart of their company culture; control of ideas, secrets and perceptions.
I just find it really interesting that this personality seems to come across so strongly in the design of its newer products and services; from the minimalist industrial design of the iPad to the capabilities it grants its users on its operating system and the business model at the core of the ever-expanding iTunes Store.
You could look on this as being negative and dictatorial, or you could give Apple credit for really and truly living their personality in everything they do. In any case, it’s no harm to have a rummage through the thoughts that seem to underlie what is likely to become an important product.
Apple, you scary amazing clever bastards.
Paul May is a web and user experience consultant from Dublin, Ireland; he works for web design company Front. He likes to blog about all things web, some thing triathlon. Feel free to email him directly (or you can use the contact form). You can also get him on twitter or flickr. Paul enjoys writing in the third person.
Comments
Since writing this I’ve talked to people about iPad, thought some more. I still think iPad is a product that speaks volumes about Apple as a company, but practically speaking it’s a just-good-enough product that helps the company validate iPad as a concept, test a market, and do all of this without spending a penny more than is necessary. There’s a reason Apple have a stack of cash in the bank, it’s because they control just enough, and offer just enough; iterate.