Which iPad to Get?

With the iPad 2 going sale this friday (11-Mar-2011), many people are thinking about which iPad to get and whether it is worth upgrading. I have an iPad 1 3G with 16 GB and am thinking about this as well.

3G or not?

3G gives you the freedom to access the Internet anywhere there is cell coverage. In the car, around town, shopping, or in a waiting room. To me, this is a big part of what makes iPad so useful. In addition to Internet access, the 3G model includes a GPS receiver and compass to support location-based services. While you may not rely on the Maps application, location-based features include getting local weather, theater listings, social networking and so forth. A lot of things become easier or even possible when the iPad knows where you are. The 3G model also synchronizes the clock to the cellular network avoiding possibly awkward clock drift of 10 minutes or more.

Put simply, the 3G model is the full iPad experience Apple envisioned. The WiFi only model is a necessary compromise to achieve the psychologically important $499 entry level price.

If cost is important, consider skipping the iPhone in favor of a prepaid feature phone. With the money you save, you can buy 2 iPads including mobile Internet. iPads can make and receive phone calls, handle Email, SMS, IM etc. From my perspective, the iPad with 3G offers a richer mobile computing experience than any smartphone at a fraction of the cost if you are willing to carry it with you.

I love the iPhone, but spending $2000 on voice and data is a big expense for many. With the iPad 3G, $15 month gives you the best of the mobile Internet with no contract.

16, 32, or 64 GB of Flash Memory?

Unless you have a large collection of music, photos, or video you need to carry with you, stick with 16 GB. 16 GB is plenty for most uses, and the technology is changing so fast you'll most likely want to upgrade in a couple years anyway to get a newer radio (LTE), faster processor, more memory, etc.

AT&T or Verizon?

Advantages of AT&T:

(1) If your cellular data needs are modest since you will mostly be using WiFi at home or work, AT&T is less expensive at $14.99/month for 250 MB. Apple had a hand in creating this plan and it really is $14.99 per month with no surprises. You can start or stop any time you like again with no surprises. Verizon's plan starts at $20/mo for 1GB, but beware of fees and taxes. If you plan to use Verizon, ask around to determine your actual monthly bill, including starting service, stopping service, and going over your monthly allotment.

(2) AT&T's data service can be faster under good conditions.

(3) If you travel outside the US, especially in Europe, GSM is widely available. Verizon's CDMA is not.

(4) GSM can handle simultaneous voice and data on the iPhone. Not an issue for iPad.

(5) Apple has more experience with AT&T so the product and service is more mature.

Advantages of using Verizon:

(1) Verizon has the largest network and better coverage in many areas (but not always). If you travel extensively around the US, Verizon has more coverage in more places including the Metro in Washington DC. If you mostly stay within a single geographic region, ask the locals how the respective coverage works for them.

(2) If you expect to use more than the minimal data plan, Verizon could be less expensive.

(3) Verizon's CDMA radio technology (from Qualcomm) is more efficient, so the GSM camp adopted it for their 3G. Verizon has better 3G frequencies in many areas, which means better coverage indoors.

(4) Verizon is not AT&T. If you already have an AT&T iPhone, you can gain some redundancy and additional coverage by adding Verizon.

(5) Verizon has many corporate customers (including the federal government), so your employer may already have a deal with them.

iPad 1 or iPad 2

I'm still ambivalent around this. The iPad 1 I have works really well and I love my ZeroChroma Vario case. It lets me rest the iPad almost anywhere and adjust it to just the right angle, or hold my iPad more comfortably. A refurbished iPad 1 with 3G is available directly from Apple for $479 ($150 savings) which is pushing down iPad 1 resale values.

The selection of cases for the iPad 2 is likely to be slim at first. While I like the idea of Apple's smart cover, I carry my iPad almost everywhere and appreciate having a shell to protect it from the minor dings of everyday use.

On the upside, the iPad 2 represents the leading edge of mobile computing and affords new applications I haven't even imagined yet. The combination of geo-tagged photos, video, gyroscope, and dual core processing will open many doors. Being able to mirror anything to an external display will be invaluable to some.

I'll probably wait a month or two to hear how the iPad 2 is received and then make a decision.

Enjoy!

Replacing Apple Downloads with the Mac App Store

Apple is correct to recognize that the Mac App Store offers a way to create more value. But their letter to developers asserts:

"Because we believe the Mac App Store will be the best destination for users to discover, purchase, and download your apps, we will no longer offer apps on the Mac OS X Downloads site."

This statement is subjective and depends on who "your apps" is referring to and what the user is looking for. The Mac App Store is open to self contained productivity and entertainment apps that may access the Internet. Based on Apple's published guidelines, the Mac App Store IS NOT open to system utilities, disk utilities, network utilities, software that attempts to enhance the user interface of existing system facilities, or most plug-ins including browser, Email, and Address Book plug-ins.

Why? Placing code or resources in any shared area or requesting privilege escalation is prohibited.

In order for Apple's assertion above to be broadly true, Apple would need to offer a "Mac Utility Store" or other venue for applications that cannot meet the Mac App Store restrictions. This would include many award winning tools like Disk Warrior, Super Duper!, Default Folder X, 1Password, and other system maintenance utilities and plug-ins. Ironically, many Macworld Editor's Choice Award winning products are not eligible to appear in the Mac App Store. To say the Mac App Store is the "best destination for users to discover, purchase, and download your apps" is understandable marketing speak, but it's not the whole story.

I understand the hype machine can only focus on one thing at a time, but I hope Apple will consider expanding the scope of their Mac App Store(s) to truly become the "best destination" to discover great software.

Respectfully Submitted,

- Peter Sichel
Sustainable Softworks

Network Neutrality Made Simple

Much of the debate around Network Neutrality has tended to obfuscate what is essential to regulate with what is controversial, so I'd like to spell it out simply.

(1) Wireless airwaves and landline right of ways belong to the public.

(2) Government has granted a small number of business organizations a license or charter to provide voice and data communication services to the public based on these public resources.

(3) Building and operating the nations communication networks gives these organizations certain powers which the public has an interest in regulating. The charter granted to these business organizations to provide voice and data communication services to the public prohibits any attempt to give themselves or anyone else an unfair competitive advantage over any other lawful communication service that runs on top of these network facilities. The public's interest in an open Internet that supports efficient innovation requires this.

Point 3 is the crux of Network Neutrality. Certain carriers have tried to obfuscate the issue by saying they need the ability to offer premium services and manage the network which Network Neutrality would somehow prohibit. I respectfully disagree. The issue is whether Internet data carriers can grant themselves an unfair competitive advantage by virtue of controlling the pipes. The answer that best serves the public interest is "no".

For example, Network Neutrality says that Comcast may not restrict access to Netflix or charge a premium for such access so as to make their own video on demand services more competitive. They can manage the bandwidth available for streaming, but they must not discriminate based on the content itself or who provides it. The user decides what services they choose to access.

Does Android Compete with iPhone?

The race is on, Android sales are catching up with iPhone, and we all know a race implies a winner. The question that's not as widely considered is how much these products actually compete?  First, Android is an operating system used by multiple vendors, so we need to consider Apple's iOS eco-system and what these respective products bring to the market.

If you are a cell phone maker looking for a low cost licensable OS, Android is a clear winner.  If you're a cell phone carrier looking to offer a family of attractive "smart phones" you can customize to add "carrier value", again Android is a winner.  But what do these respective products offer to the people who actually buy and use them?

Android

- A cell phone available on multiple carriers.

- A flexible Internet communication device that offers mobile Web, Email, Maps, navigation, social networking, and the ability to run 3rd party apps.

- Lower cost in some cases but not others.

Android is a remarkable product, and if it weren't for the iPhone, it would be far ahead of anything else in its field, but the iPhone and iOS mobile platform arrived first.

iPhone/iOS

- A cell phone currently available through some carriers.

- A flexible Internet communication device that offers mobile Web, Email, Maps, navigation, social networking, and the ability to run 3rd party apps.

- A best in class App store available in 60 countries.

- A best in class portable music platform (iPod).

- A best in class mobile gaming platform (iPod Touch).

- A best in class mobile tablet (iPad) that serves as a book reader, electronic publishing channel, and is well suited to other business applications.

- Best in class battery life.

- Best in class retail product support.

- A consistent user experience that is always responsive and not bogged down by crapware.

- A restrained design that does not overwhelm new users with all the things it can do before they experience finding and downloading software from the App Store.

- A vast eco-system of product accessories.

- A consistent upgrade path.

- A broadly supported mobile computing platform that offers a consistent target for mobile application developers.

The next question one might reasonably ask is which of these differences are sustainable?  The surprising answer is most of them.  Some are based on long term investments which cannot be easily replicated (iTunes + iTMS, over 300 Apple retail stores, Mac desktop, Xcode developer tool chain). Another big factor is profitability to sustain ongoing development and innovation.  Apple's vertically integrated business model has proven to be highly profitable at almost every level.  In contrast, Android development is largely funded by Google's Search business. Whether this business model can expand to support an iOS like eco-system is an interesting question.

Today, both Android and iPhone/iOS are clearly successful.  It is not my intention to predict a winner, but to point out how these products address very different market needs with relatively modest overlap. Both products have enormous growth potential. Android offers a powerful Internet enabled smartphone that is not locked down by a single vendor. iPhone/iOS offers a powerful, easy to use mobile computing platform that was not previously available.

As a smartphone OS, Android is a huge success. As a mobile platform OS, iOS has more developers and more software which is attracting ever increasing investment. When it comes to mobile touch screen tablets, there is only one well stocked App store with software designed specifically for the tablet format. If Android fails to attract significant tablet software over the next year, while Apple remains on track to sell over 40 million iPads, the difference will become more apparent.

Why Do Companies Release Products Before They Are Ready?

In his Personal Tech column for 16-Sep-2010, New York Times columnist David Pogue asks:

"Why do companies bring products to market that they know and even admit aren't ready?"

Having worked at one such company, I became all too familiar with the pattern. At most companies, managers are judged on their ability to deliver on schedule, yet it's not until you actually start using the product that you discover many of the things that don't work right or need to be improved.  The pressure is to follow the schedule and make the best of it.  Nobody wants to be a complainer.

At Apple, senior management uses the product on a daily basis until they are confident customers will say wow! The rule at Apple is it doesn't ship it until users say wow!  Apple still makes mistakes and discovers problems after a product has shipped, but for the most part their stuff works from the users point of view. If Apple does discover a problem, they have resources in place to upgrade or replace defective units in the field.

The key difference in thinking is actually revealed in the question itself. The management at most technology companies believe they are selling a "product" that meets a set of previously agreed upon specifications.  It must do A, B, and C, and the sooner we can ship it the better.  Apple believes they are selling a "User Experience". The hardware is a vehicle for delivering a great user experience, not an end in itself.

Apple still cares about schedules, but they recognize that the most important learning occurs after they begin using the product internally, and that providing a great user experience is a much bigger competitive advantage than being first to market or having the lowest price.

For years analysts questioned why Apple's didn't have a Netbook strategy. With the introduction of the iPad, we see that while other manufacturers were producing stripped down lower cost notebooks, Apple was doing the real work of thinking about what makes for a great mobile computing experience and what can be left out.

Apple's focus on the user experience also clarifies why Apple insists on greater control over the software that runs on their mobile iOS products. Apple is not merely selling a mobile device that runs software and allows you to make phone calls, Apple is selling a user experience that ties in to a global brand image and "digital lifestyle".

Network Neutrality: What Google and Verizon Should Have Said

Google and Verizon recently offered a "compromise" proposal that accepted Network Neutrality for wired networks with limited enforcement, but then carved out exceptions for wireless and premium services. Here are the main points I think Google and Verizon should have acknowledged:

(1) We understand that wireless airwaves and landline right of ways belong to the public.

(2) We understand that we have been granted a license or charter to provide voice and data communication services based on these public resources.

(3) Building and operating the nations communications network gives us a great deal of power. We understand that we have not been granted a charter to give ourselves or anyone else an unfair competitive advantage over any other lawful communication service that runs on top of our network facilities. The public's interest in an open Internet that supports efficient innovation requires this.

Point 3 is the crux of Network Neutrality. Verizon keeps trying to obfuscate the issue by saying they need the ability to offer premium services and manage the network which Network Neutrality would somehow prohibit. I respectfully disagree.  The issue is whether Internet data carriers can grant themselves an unfair competitive advantage by virtue of controlling the pipes.  The answer that best serves the public interest is "no".

Don't Get the iPad? Just wait a little, it will get bigger.

I've noticed a number of online comments and reports from people who say they just don't get the iPad and seem disappointed Apple has sold so many.  Imagine you are back in 1976 and Apple has just released the Apple II, the first off-the-shelf personal computer you don't have assemble from a kit.  Executives at IBM and Digital Equipment Corporation were puzzled what the big deal was.  Why would anyone want a computer at home?  Especially one that does so little?  Yet within less than 15 years, PC software was driving much of the computer industry. Why? People did want affordable personal computers at home, while others recognized the opportunity and wrote gorgeous applications that 10's of millions of users could enjoy.

Back to 2010: Why would anyone want an instant on, easy to use, location aware, Internet capable, easy to carry, mobile computer that does so little?

(1) Because it offers a great user experience that wasn't previously available.  The iPad is an ideal size for reading, allows you to keep the Internet within easy reach, and offers thousands of Apps to support whatever interests you have.

(2) The focus of innovation has shifted.  Some of the best and most creative new software is being written for the iPad.

When I worked at Digital in the 1980's, we had endless debates about the difference between a Personal Computer and a Workstation.  Many at Digital would single out some hardware difference: the larger display, better graphics, built-in networking, or even the price.  They were all wrong.  The real difference that mattered was the software it ran.

When Steve Balmer says "The operating system is called Windows", I think he's making the same mistake.

Don't get the iPad?  Just wait a little, it will get bigger.

Some Common Observations

It doesn't do Adobe Flash

Few mobile computers do because 3 years after the first iPhone, Adobe has yet to deliver a version of Flash that works well on mobile devices.  Some technologies that don't translate well to a mobile environment will be left behind.

It doesn't include a phone

Yes, and it doesn't include a $70/month phone bill and 2 year contract. Voice is not the primary App for the iPad, but you can use Skype or other VoIP services if you wish.

It's just a big iPhone

A swimming pool is just a big bathtub, but we use it for different things. The iPad is a comfortable size for reading.  The responsive touch interface, clever use of panning+zooming, and focus on one task at a time makes the device almost disappear as you become absorbed in the flow of what you are doing.

The landscape keyboard is good enough for lightweight typing, while adding a Bluetooth keyboard accommodates heavy lifting.

It doesn't include a camera

Yes, it's a v1.0 product that starts at $499.

It doesn't do multitasking

I expect we'll see this when iOS4 comes to the iPad later this year.

It doesn't do handwriting recognition

Yes, but there are plenty of note taking apps that will record and even recognize your scribbles if you want that. Part of what makes the iPad such a joy to use is that Apple did the hard work of thinking about what is essential to a great mobile experience, and what can be left out. Fumbling for a stylus to do pixel perfect input is not fun when you are mobile. I believe this is one of the key insights behind the iPad's successful user interface (time will tell). A lot of people choose not to carry a pen in their pocket everywhere they go.

It doesn't synch wirelessly to the cloud for stand alone operation

Providing a great user experience for system backup and restore, software update, synchronizing multiple devices, and managing large media collections is hard. Apple still sees the Mac (or PC) as the hub of your digital life style.  Many professionals (like me) are not ready to trust all their personal data to the cloud. Apple's approach feels safe and inspires confidence. If you've ever upgraded from one iPod to another, you know how easy this is.  Over time, I expect we'll see more options that migrate services to the cloud.