Free Newsletter
Seybold's take: Applications for the iPad
I am not one who believes that the iPad will be a huge success, but I do believe it will be successful in its own right. The iPad simply is not in the same class as the iPhone. Still, there are opportunities for developers to provide content by way of the iPad and make money doing so, as long as they do not view the iPad as simply a larger iPhone.
While many developers are likely to simply adapt their existing iPhone apps for the larger iPad screen, I believe the iPad will be used differently because unlike the iPhone, most customers will not carry their iPad with them all of the time. This means that many of the applications that have become hits on the iPhone will not find the same success on the iPad. Rather, what is needed is a newer set of applications that take full advantage of the new screen real estate while providing services that make the iPad a success as an occasional-use device.
The primary functional difference I see between the two devices is that the iPhone is an unconscious-carry device that is always with us and the iPad is a conscious-carry device that we won't always take with us. This means that there must be a different thought process used in the development of the applications if they are to propel the iPad toward success.
For starters, many iPad users will not opt for a full wide-area wireless broadband subscription. Instead, they will use it for communications when near a Wi-Fi hotspot or subscribe to an occasional-use wide-area broadband plan. Applications that assume full wireless connectivity anytime the iPad is on will not be as well received as applications that are developed for occasional use. Many iPhone apps are constantly updating the information they provide, but iPad applications that require a constant or almost-constant connection will not be as functional.
Streaming content needs to be able to be downloaded and stored on the iPad so that viewing is not limited to periods of connectivity, which means that memory management will be a key to the success of a variety of applications. Because of its graphical user interface, along with the other attributes of the iPad, it will have to be managed better than other ebook readers, for example. On my Kindle, I don't spend much time purging my read books or transferring them to a memory card because the text version of a book takes up a lot less room than more robust graphical representations of the same book. I believe that iPad applications should download and store material I want to use or read in the future.
Likewise, real-time updates that are a developer's friend on the iPhone will need to be modified so that requests for updates occur only during periods of connectivity. Further, due to the amount of data usage required for graphic images, customers should be able to limit the number of updates, and it should be very clear to them how much of their memory has been used and how it can be cleaned up and recycled.
In a recent FCC blog, several officials expressed their concern that the iPad could lead to further data congestion on the AT&T network. Much of this concern has to do with streaming content such as movies and videos. iPhone users are already viewing many videos and other content in real time. Perhaps a better solution will be to download content to the iPad for later viewing. This could be accomplished by providing compression-based downloads that would enable the content to be stored. Yes, there are some issues with copyrights and ownership, but they could be addressed by preventing the video from be copied, providing for automatic erasure after X number of viewings, or a variety of other methods.
I believe that the success of the iPad will be determined by the applications that are developed to run on it. Apple invented a new platform, and like the iPhone, it is an elegant platform. Also like the iPhone, the applications for the platform will make or break the device. There is a several-month lead time before the iPad becomes available in stores, and smart developers will use this time to plan their offerings and to make sure what they are offering iPad customers is not simply a revamped iPhone application.
Because the iPad will not be an always-on, always-connected device, applications will have to recognize that fact and compensate for this difference between the two platforms. The screen size will appeal to those who want to watch more video content, play games on a larger screen, and access their own information when the device is in use. It will be interesting to see how the developer community responds to the iPad and if developers come to understand the differences between it and the iPhone quickly, or if it will take some time to learn that these platforms are different and that the content provided to each should be different.
Andrew M. Seybold is an authority on technology and trends shaping the world of wireless mobility. A respected analyst, consultant, commentator, author and active participant in industry trade organizations, his views have influenced strategies and shaped initiatives for telecom, mobile computing and wireless industry leaders worldwide. www.andrewseybold.com. Don't miss the Andrew Seybold Wireless University on Monday, March 22, 2010, at CTIA Wireless 2010, Las Vegas, Nev.
Comments
Posted by Scott D | February 9, 2010 - 12:13pm
I think you are short on it not being a big seller like the iphone... this is gonna be the all communication carry your digital life with you... i have a laptop and cant stand taking it with me, I use my phone at the gym for music and wish the fitness apps were bgger and easier to use... the ipads gonna be my portable everything notebook, reading book... laptop... i cant wait... and i think many people will feel the same about it.
Posted by Projectile | February 9, 2010 - 12:20pm
Andrew,
Your right to say the iPad is an "unconscious-carry device" but still the allure is full time connectivity or at least when possible. Full time connectivity expectations will drive the iPad development effort.
I'd like to see more people like yourself call Steve Jobs out on some of the more totally asinine design shortcomings of the iPad. Like the Micro Sim, wow what a slap in the face to users of GSM/SIM based communication services. To provide a SIM not common to most GSM carriers worldwide, just to lock down the user base to one carrier is beyond ridiculous. That I, could not just take out my phones SIM and take advantage of my current data plan rate, just floors me. The sad part is most people don't mind when Apple pulls off stunts like these and they get free passes. But just maybe the consumer is a little wiser today, then when they first bought there Apple iPhone, with crippled Bluetooth, non existent MMS support (Just Cause Apple thought MMS was an old Tech and not worthy)
Posted by Anonymous | February 9, 2010 - 12:33pm
I am looking forward to the iPad as a possible solution for professional work in the area of health and human services. I do assessments and write reports. I collect and analyze data. I develop plans and make recommendations. I track clients both in terms of progress as well as for administrative purposes. Privacy is a huge issue. My office is where the problems are, and I go to the problems rather than have them come to me. I am not looking for a device for entertainment purposes, but media presentations can be valuable for training and during presentations. I want to be able to access and store printed media for use as I need it. I want to be able to use the device to access, review, update and print my own products. Entering words and data easily and then accessing it for analysis is my top priority. I may want to keep the day's local newspaper on it and maybe a book or two. If the iPad can do these things, I will be a likely buyer. Music, movies, games, social networking, etc. are nice glitzy features, but I don't want them to interfere with function.
I agree that the software for the iPad will make it or break it. I'll be looking for applications that help me be productive rather than look nice and entertain. That's my two cents!
Posted by Joe | February 9, 2010 - 3:20pm
First, Apple didn't invent a new kind of device. Tablets have existed for years, tablets which are far more powerful. The iPad has a slower processor and less storage space than my phone. Add to that the fact that multitasking is impossible (wanna listen to music on Pandora and type an email? Too bad.) and it becomes clear that the iPad is little more than a novelty. ...but hey, if you want to spend 500 bucks on obsolete hardware from a company asking for an anti-trust suit, be my guest.
Posted by Joe | February 9, 2010 - 3:20pm
First, Apple didn't invent a new kind of device. Tablets have existed for years, tablets which are far more powerful. The iPad has a slower processor and less storage space than my phone. Add to that the fact that multitasking is impossible (wanna listen to music on Pandora and type an email? Too bad.) and it becomes clear that the iPad is little more than a novelty. ...but hey, if you want to spend 500 bucks on obsolete hardware from a company asking for an anti-trust suit, be my guest.
Posted by Hoagus | February 9, 2010 - 7:19pm
We can all guess and prognosticate, but no one even has an iPad yet, and the app ideas are just starting to incubate. I think we'll all be surprised once again to see just how this new kind of tablet changes things.
Posted by Bruce Blausen | February 10, 2010 - 5:17pm
Agree with earlier comment that iPad will be a major "media presentation device" in business/profession environments. We at Blausen Medical have a very successful Human Atlas iPhone app that delivers 3D animations of 150 medical conditions and treatments that healthcare professionals use right at point of care to educate their patients, saving time and alleviating patient fears. Can't wait till the iPad explodes in the healthcare vertical. Our content, going from the iPhone display to the iPad will be awesome and even more effective. We belive that iPad will be a major player in the healthcare vertical.
Bruce Blausen, CEO
Blausen Medical
Posted by chandan maruthi | February 16, 2010 - 1:25am
Hi,
I have just posted an article on Applications of the Ipad . The article illustrates ways in which the Ipad could be used much different from what the creators may have thought . check it out here.
http://chandanscorner.wordpress.com/2010/02/14/top-10-applications-of-the-apple-ipad-and-other-tablets/
Posted by james0309 | February 18, 2010 - 2:03pm
Joe,
wanna listen to music on Pandora and type an email? Too bad.
The iPhone's built-in iPod app allows you to multitask on the phone, so I don't see this as an issue at all. I can't understand why it upsets you that others might want to buy an iPad. What do you care? I'll exercise my consumer sovereignty and you exercise yours. Simple.
Posted by Taylor | February 21, 2010 - 12:10am
Joe,
The iPad has less storage space than your phone and slower processor???? Which phone do you have because I sure as hell would like a phone with more than a gig processor and 64 gigs of storage...
And I agree with James, I rather listen to my own music than streaming through Pandora for some reason... talk about obsolete
Posted by David Carnevale | February 24, 2010 - 6:16pm
Andy ... As always thoughtful and provocative. Perhaps we should coin a new term "Paddies" for those who become users of the iPad (I'm likely to be one ...).
Seriously, a key constraint of any battery-powered mobile device is the complex set of tradeoffs among battery-life, physical size, heat generation and "payload" (size, number concurrent and complexity of applications). If you want to increase one, one or more of the others must decrease.
True multitasking using multi-core processors generates more heat and drains batteries faster. Devices like the iPad are not supposed to be "mini me" versions of laptops, or tablet PCs like netbooks are.
Remember the "Personal Communicator" term we developed at Regis McKenna (for what was going to be a type of pen-based computers)? The whole ides of developing that term was an attempt to not have those kinds of devices compared to laptops running full suites of Microsoft applications.
Same goes for the iPad and similar products. They are not supposed to be full computer systems in the general sense, rather they are more targeted platforms for a sub-set of (hopefully high) use. As you said, it remains to be seen how many consumers that will be; but from a PR perspective, is there anyone who has not heard about the iPad? Talk about free advertising ... Call me anything, just but call me!
SHARE
WITH:
Comments (11) | Post a comment