Ed Note: 01/27/10 I updated the name from iTablet to iPad to match today’s announcement re: the product name.
Now that the news of Apple’s tablet device has percolated up from the likes of Mashable to the Wall Street Journal it’s interesting to see how the story evolves. Mashable and other geekerati sites are rumor mills about features. WSJ’s article is about industry and use.
While initial hype and limited sales may come from the feature-obsessed technophile fringe, marketplace success (other than good PR for Apple just by putting it out there) will lie largely on the uptake by non-geeks. Ultimately this will come down to usefulness. It’s tempting to compare the revolution created by the iPod to what could happen with the iPad (or whatever it will be called). I don’t think it will be the same and here’s why:
Music vs. Magazines & TV
The popularity of music has never waned. Everyone listens to music. Many people, especially young people, have parts of their own identity wrapped up in it. In this way the content was never the problem for consumers, the distribution (and cost) were. MP3 compression solved these problems by making music portable, small (in terms of file size and physical size) and cheap (or free). The iPod became the defacto distribution system for MP3 files. Apple’s brilliance was in seeing the future of music in MP3 before anyone else did. They got the first mover advantage and combined with an elegant user experience iPod dominated while others have been playing catch-up. Today the eBook is solving a similar problem – portability and cost improvement. Fewer people read books than listen to music and so that revolution will be smaller.
Magazines and newspapers (one of the target content types for iPad) have a different problem. Yes, physical magazines and newspapers are more cumbersome than digital versions and would benefit in the way eBooks do from digital delivery but that’s not why newspapers and magazines are failing. If it were, moving them online and making the content free (the same tactic that revolutionized the music business) would’ve begun solving the problem. It hasn’t. Website magazines and newpapers have not stanched the bleeding and the publishers have not been able to restructure their businesses to live in the lower-revenue environment they now finds themselves in. (Neither has music entirely, but its made some progress by managing bands differently.)
Let’s start with news. News travels at Twitter-speed now, undermining the new industry’s role in ‘breaking news.’ What’s they’re left with is depth and commentary, two things they can do more professionally than amateurs with Twitter accounts. Newsweek and others have moved to an editorial/commentary format. The jury is still out on whether its interesting enough for people to keep paying for.
Beyond news there’s gossip, celebratory voyeurism, and niche interests. Perez Hilton is doing gossip and celebrity voyeurism better than People magazine. Niche interests also struggle with specialty websites. Even commentary is a tougher market as bloggers wedge their way onto the shortlist of respectable commentators.
So will making InTouch, People, Newsweek, The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal and other publications available on the iPad make their content more relevant to people than it is today? I’m not so sure. The reality is, increasingly people with limited time are choosing different types of content. They’re less reliant on traditional magazine and newspaper publishers not because of the distribution system, but because there are more content options available. Publishers are destined to get a smaller piece of the pie. By my observing, people can get traditional publications online and free today and they’re still choosing alternatives anyhow. Secondly, to get the same content I can get free on my laptop or iPhone now on a tablet I need to drop $1000 and potentially purchase a subscription. Why would I do that?
Television is the other traditional medium that the Journal points to as being a target for the iPad. The problem again is more likely a matter of content. Watching TV has not gotten harder or more cumbersome. In fact the TV experience has been improved and made more accessible by home theatre, flat screen television, and Hulu-like web-based services etc. Yet viewership declines on programs across the board. That tells me the channel isn’t really the problem, the relevance of the content is. With only 24 hours in a day people choose what interests them, and now they can find anything they want. An increasing percentage of that content is coming from alternative providers like video game creators and pro-am content creators. Hollywood has fewer ‘hits’ in a year because people are finding interesting things elsewhere. Sure, there will always be a market for TV, but I don’t think making people pay to view it on an iPad will increase these programs ratings or share of market.
The last issue is pure practicality. If I’m already watching a downloaded movie on my iPod Touch will a 12″ screen experience on the commuter train be worth the extra $1K and the bulk in my bag (which is already heavy with a laptop)? The tablet is less portable and more expensive and delivers the same material on a larger screen. One more device in my backpack for something I can already get on devices I have? No, thanks. Short of some remarkable new functionality I can’t see how the device becomes indispensible the way my laptop and phone are.
I’m sure there will be endless hype about the iPad. Having impacted music and telephony so significantly in recent years the expectations are high and Apple has something of a Hand-Of-God reputation. But they miss like anyone else and 5 years from now, my guess is, this will be recorded as a ‘miss’ in terms of a revolutionary, game-changing device. It’s destined to be a fringe toy like the Air netbook, the original Apple Cube computer and even Apple TV. All were interesting and innovative products but they just didn’t fit in with most people’s lives.
Posted by Corey
The
Would the iPhone be as enjoyable a purchase if it came in a crappy blow-molded plastic package? Hell, Apple is so good at details, even their replacement adapter is packaged artfully (taking some of the sting out of shelling out eighty balloons to replace something that maybe shouldn’t have broken in the first place). And the owners manual for an iPod shuffle is a single card – the embodiment of user-friendly simplicity.
Is it me or is Twitter a little distracting and borderline annoying? I realize to keep up with the times – and particularly as Twitter is enjoying its tipping point – I am almost obligated to have a feed. I’m using
This tickles me to no end. For all the deep conversations about how the Internet is changing the world, reinventing business, etc. etc. you still have moments of pure ‘Nettiness’. Look at the origins of terms like
I’ve only gotten to write about this today, but its something I’ve been thinking about for some months now. With the iPhone my iPod application really has no ‘off’ switch. It’s always there, and only needs to know whether to play or not to play (how Shakespearean).
