Article: iPad, or Something Like an iPad?

It seems that every time Apple introduce a new device into the market there is – perhaps within a matter of days – dozens of cheap imitation ‘Apple-killer’ devices, running similar or lower specifications and open-source imitation operating systems. It was seen with the original iPod and its apparent 'killer', the Creative Zen; it was seen too with the iPhone and its numerous ‘iPhone-killer’ devices such as the Nexus One; and it’s been seen countless times with the iPad too, with hundreds of Android based tablets being announced or introduced to the market within the next few months, such as the Galaxy Tab.

This creates rife competition and gives users a choice: to buy Apple branded products or other, similar yet alternative products. But, after all, even Apple isn’t perfect; so I argue:

If I wanted ‘something like an iPad’, I’d buy an iPad: the great problem with tablet design

But there is a grave problem with the design process, which can be summed up in but one word: imitation. Every device to be introduced tries to imitate the Apple related product to such an extent that we don’t have a huge choice of variously endowed devices, but rather a choice between, say, an iPad or ‘something like an iPad’…

With various new tablet devices being introduced into the market over the next few months it saddens me to see that many companies even have only one button on their tablet – mimicking Apple’s ridiculous ‘buttonophobia’ – and the exact same layout to Apple branded products too, but there are no new features being implemented, or at least nothing revolutionary.

I seem to be one of the few who really think that Apple did not get it right with the iPad. It’s not a blow at Apple as a whole – I’ve loved many of their flagship devices, including the original iPhone, the latest two generations of the iPod Touch, and the original iPods, now labelled the iPod Classics. All of those devices had great, innovative designs and sublime hardware. So what’s wrong with the iPad? Let us take a look:


The Operating System

The iPad is a tablet, which to me has always implied a compact touch-screen computer, and one that is devoid of a keyboard or mouse. As such, you expect a tablet to ideally be capable of performing standard computer functions. The iPad, however, runs a mobile operating system: worse, it runs a stripped down mobile operating system – i.e. iOS but without the phone functions and limitations on the apps you can use.

It’s not completely fair to blame Apple for this approach, however. Designing an operating system for a tablet it difficult, and a mobile operating system is very intuitive to use on touch-screen devices; nevertheless, it certainly is possible to run a full operating system on a device – as is done with many of the Windows 7 tablets recently announced – but these tend to simply be skinned-up desktop operating systems, giving the devices an absolutely terrible user interface.

It’s a careful balancing act between creating intuitive touch-screen operating systems and keeping the functionality and freedom of a desktop computer. So far, no company has succeeded in getting the operating system problem dialled!

Until this happens, the tablet will be forever doomed to be a ‘last resort’ to a dedicated computer. At least for anyone who uses a computer for anything other than ‘dicking around’.


The Low Specifications

This is a huge problem with many tablets, and it ties in intrinsically with the operating system problem too. It is most notable with the iPad, since the price is so high, but it affects other tablets too. I’ll show you what I mean:

The iPad first generation costs £430; has a 1GHz processor; 512 MB of RAM; 16GB of internal storage; WiFi b/g; a screen resolution of 1024 by 768 pixels and runs a very limited operating system, which is exactly the same as the iPod Touch’s.

To pick a PC at random, on the other hand, the Dell 1011 mini costs just £220; has a 1.6GHz processor; 512MB, 1GB or 2GB of RAM, 1024 by 600 pixel screen resolution; runs the full Windows XP operating system; owns a trackpad, keyboard and webcam; and has WiFi b/g too.

For the price, the iPad’s specifications are low (as too are other tablets) and regardless of the price, the devices are not very powerful at all. I cannot speak for others, but I would rather pay £800 for a top-of-the-range device capable of replacing my laptop than pay £430 for a device that simply supplements my laptop and is inherently below par, instead pretty much surfing the web and playing low-end touch games, videos or music.


Lack of Accessories

This is a big one for me – the lack of decent accessories. For me, a large use for tablets would be the ability to draw or perform presentations on them and, as such, a stylus would be ideal for a tablet. Whilst on an iPod Touch a stylus would just be a nuisance, on the iPad the ability to use a decent stylus would certainly be a benefit for the multitude of drawing applications.

What’s that, there are styluses available? Yes, but terrible ones! The styluses act as simply thinner fingers, allowing slightly more dexterous use, but this is no consolation for designers using the iPad.

What the iPad needs – and other tablets too – is a pressure and tilt sensitive stylus, akin to those used on graphics tablets. With Apple having full-sized monitors capable of connecting to iPads and Macbooks – or iPads to Macbooks via Bluetooth – it would seem sensible and logical to allow for the iPad could be used as a graphic tablet and to implement a tilt and pressure sensitive stylus. This could add a huge new niche to the target market of the iPad.


The Lack of Buttons

This one has always puzzled me. Apple have always suffered from some form of 'buttonophobia' and refuse somewhat belligerently to implement more than one button on the front of their devices. This may be aesthetically pleasing, but on what is essentially a compact computer, not having more than one button is a serious limitation. It's a subtle blend between having to few, such as with Apple, and too many, such as with the Samsung Galaxy Portal. After all, it is a touch screen device.

Nevertheless, having a dedicated 'back' button is surely not too much to ask. If a program crashes and we want to go back a stage, we can't on the iPad since we only have a home button. A menu button is also not present, or a simple click button. One example of a set of devices that deliver the perfect number of buttons is the HTC Desire, HTC Wildfire and HTC Google Nexus One range. A dedicated home, menu, back, search and trackpad button give just a few basic, dedicated functions that the iPad could seriously benefit from.

Whilst many devices running Android do include more than one button, it does sadden me to see that so many devices are copying Apple by implementing only one dedicated front button. It should be a designer's biggest sin to allow such an impediment as removing useful buttons merely for aesthetics; a grave, grave sin indeed.


Limitations

The iPad – and other devices – are extremely limited in their use. Whilst this is partly due to the operating system limitations, it annoys me that I can’t, say, plug in my dedicated compact camera into my iPad or Android tablet and download my photos or videos.

On my iPad, I can’t watch flash either, which is a major limitation that is pretty much tied down to Apple being immature. For this reason alone, the tablet will not replace dedicated computers.

So here are the three main problems that I have with tablets:

1. Their limited, mobile OS, which essentially just means I have paid in excess of £400 a cumbersome mobile phone that can’t make calls and has a huge screen

2. The expensive though low-grade specifications that mean I can’t run large, complex programs or sometimes even watch good HD videos, among other limitations

3. The lack of tilt or pressure sensors and a decent stylus to allow more diverse usage of a tablet

4. The limitations of upload or download capabilities, especially with other devices such as digital cameras

These have been problems for tablets for years, and certainly some of them need to be resolved; however, Apple decide that they want a HD video camera on their devices and another camera for making video ‘calls’ over WiFi (but only to other compatible Apple devices) and give it a shitty name like FaceTime (seriously, didn’t they think that sounded pretty lame?) and suddenly everyone else follows suit.

Apple has, on this instance, got it wrong. The iPad is expensive, but has no real use other than perhaps being used to surf the Internet or be used as a crummy eBook reader (LCD is difficult on the eyes as opposed to e-ink) or play low end games – all of this my phone is entirely capable of doing on a smaller screen.

There is no decent use for a tablet at the moment, and I see no reason to buy one. Until a company can demonstrate something truly unique, this will remain the case.

And please, tablet designers: don’t try to make ‘iPad killer’ devices. The iPad got it wrong – they have made a crummy device; what’s more, if I wanted something like an iPad, surely I’d just buy an iPad.

Please, tablet designers: go your own route and try to implement something truly spectacular. Try to break away from the crowd and provide the world with a tablet that does something no other tablet does, not even the iPad. Try and give us something that’s worth investing in; something that a mobile phone can’t do; something that a laptop is incapable of; something that we can’t get anywhere else; something that can be used for more than just playing basic games and surfing the net; something truly spectacular.

If you can provide us with this, we will be eternally grateful. Don’t listen to Apple’s designers, don’t follow the Apple crowd or compete for the same saturated market: do what Apple did when they first released the iPod; do what Apple did when they first cemented their name as great designers and establish their fan base; look at what missing and provide it: do something to reinvent the tablet market!