[NTLK] iMessagePad (was: Einstein running on iPhone)

[James Fraser]

Take II (apologies for the previous hiccup.)

Hello,

>While I very much agree with you on everything you said about the Newton, >I think you're being unjust towards the iPad. Let's don't forget that the >iPad is a first version of a device which is only 5 months old. 


That's one way to look at it.  Another viewpoint is that the iPad is the first version of a device five months old that's primarily derived from a product that just turned three -years- old: the iPod Touch.

They do run the same OS, after all, just different builds.  Whether or not the extra screen real estate the iPad offers is worth spending money on when you already own an iPod Touch is up to the individual consumer.


>iPad has interesting potential, in my opinion, and there's still a lot of >room for improvements and for making it -- if not a game-changing personal >computing device -- at least a more powerful, versatile machine.


I agree: it does have some interesting potential.

The thing is, the Newton was introduced by Apple with the intent of single-handedly creating a -whole new product category-.  The iPad seems to be, to me at least, largely an attempt to capitalize on an -existing- product.  

That's not to say that the iPad doesn't have its good points.  It's just that the Apple of 1993 was willing to take an enormous risk with the introduction of the MessagePad (and they got kicked in the crotch for their troubles).  The Apple of 2010, on the other hand, seems content with wringing as much as it can out of existing product lines as opposed to constantly releasing products that are so innovative, consumers aren't quite sure what to make of them, as they are so different from any other product.  

The impression I was left with re the iPad was that Apple had decided, "Hey! Let's take an already existing product, tweak the form factor a bit, pass that off as an innovative move, and watch the cash roll in!"  They had the part about the cash rolling in right, certainly, so it's hard to argue with that outlook.  

It's just that it's comparatively difficult for a large company to justify coming up with "game-changing" personal computing devices when they know that they can generate large sums of money simply by re-releasing their existing products again and again with relatively minor tweaks.  I believe that's where Apple is going to go with the iPad, though you're perfectly welcome to quote this email a couple of years from now in a point 'n laugh session. :)

True innovation entails substantial risk.  I'm not sure if the Apple of today still has the stomach for substantial risk or not.  I guess we'll have to wait and see about that one.


Best,

James Fraser