“iPad is our most advanced technology in a magical and revolutionary device at an unbelievable price”
Steve Jobs, Apple’s CEO.

The iPad is perhaps the most anticipated product launch of the year and was launched yesterday by Apple CEO Steve Jobs with much fanfare and applause.

As usual with Apple the product looks great, but what is it, and do we really need it?

The iPad

Weighing in at 1.5 pounds (680g), or just slightly less than a bag of sugar, it isn’t light when compared to say a newspaper or paperback but then it is light enough to carry around and hold in your hands for a while, which is precisely what is it intended for.

The device allows the reading and writing of emails, browsing the web, viewing videos and photos, listening to music and even playing games, all through the touch screen whilst on the move.

The device also includes the new iBookStore (an iTunes for books) to download books as well as compatibility with almost all of the Apps in the iPhone store. The iPad will also feature iWork for iPad although confusingly it seems that the actual applications, Pages, Keynote and Numbers will be sold separately at $9.99 each (which works out at £6.20, but will most likely be £9.99).

All this browsing and typing can be done on the screen, the same as the iPhone, or the iPad Keyboard Dock that features a full size keyboard, handy for those long emails. The battery apparently means that you’ll have up to ten hours for all of your music playing, surfing, and emailing, slightly longer than most netbooks.

The iPad is due to be on sale at the end of March and will also come in two versions, a Wi-Fi only version, or a Wi-Fi and 3G version.

Do I need an iPad?

After the clapping and the cheers, the question that everyone needs to ask themselves is: What is it for?

Like the HP Slate it is aimed at the gap between smartphone users and netbook users. What gap? I hear you ask. Well, this could be the product flaw that no-one at HP, Apple and Microsoft seem to be aware of – there is no gap and even if there was, does this really fill it?

The premise appears to be that a phone is too small to successfully browse the internet, view photos and watch videos and this is certainly true, and so the iPad and Slate are meant to fulfill that need. Problem is, in the UK at least, most people aren’t too concerned.

Less than 25% of Brits surf the net on their mobile phone, and even worse, 40% of smartphone users (e.g. Blackberry and iPhone users) don’t use their device for the internet! And with most British mobile phone owners stating that they’d not be interested in getting a phone that can surf the net, you have to wonder just who the iPad/Slate is aimed at?

Will people purchase this device merely to browse the internet and view photos and videos? Presuming that it will be priced around £500, it seems unlikely, particularly as it means no YouTube or Flash video, as the iPad does not support Flash.

The 9.7 inch screen is smaller than most netbooks, which cost half the price, and the iPad/Slate suffers from a killer flaw when compared to a netbook – it does not have a keyboard.

This may not be so much of a problem when merely surfing the internet or perhaps even updating Twitter or Facebook, but what about email? If you’re thinking of writing more than a few lines, the iPad/iPhone keyboard is unlikely to cut the mustard, especially when compared to a proper keyboard like that on a netbook or laptop. Sure it comes with a keyboard dock, but surely carrying that around just in case you’re going to need to write out a long email negates the point of an iPad/Slate?

The iPad also does not support multi-tasking, in other words if you’re writing an email and need to refer to a website, spreadsheet, or word document, tough luck; better use a netbook.

Add to that the possibility of needing to word process or create a spreadsheet and the experience will quickly become annoying and long winded. Far better to wait until you get home to a proper computer to edit that word document or spreadsheet. Which also begs the question, can the iPad print? It seems highly unlikely, which means emailing it or copying it across a network to a computer that can print, far easier perhaps to just use that computer in the first place.

That really just leaves the ebook aspect of the device, but is that going to catch on?

Is the iPad an e-reader?

I admit, I may be a little biased in this regard. I am a fan of e-readers, although the technology (and the price!) means that I have yet to purchase one, but the premise is one that I can associate with. An endless supply of books at your fingertips, newspapers, magazines and all on a device that can be carried around with you!

A brilliant concept, but not one that is really ready just yet, but sadly the iPad and even the Slate aren’t even up to that standard as yet. Neither use e-ink, just standard screens and having read books on laptops, PCs, netbooks and smartphones I can verify that it is not anywhere near a replacement for a book.

Add to this the fact that the iPad has a battery life of just ten hours, at best, (compared to e-readers having days) it is unlikely that after a day of browsing internet, updating Facebook and Twitter and emailing, that you’d have enough battery life for a good read before bed.

There is also the point that any decent, and in most cases free, e-book reading software can be used on a netbook, which too can be held like a book and its screen flipped, so other than looks it doesn’t really have one up on a netbook in this regard anyway.

The idea that this type of device will be carried around and used instead of a mobile phone or netbook misses another point. People carry their mobiles phones around ostensibly to make and receive telephone calls, not to check email, update twitter or facebook, surf the net, view photos or even listen to music. The iPad/Slate cannot make phone calls so those that purchase one will still need to carrying their phone with them.

That just leaves it as a netbook/laptop replacement, but who is likely to need to carry around a netbook/laptop with them all day and favour this instead?

Students? Maybe but the device isn’t cheap, and writing emails, assignments and essays isn’t going to be easy. I think that most students would go for the cheaper and more versatile netbook.

That just leaves the business men and women who need to be constantly in touch with the office, but again what does this device offer that their Blackberry or iPhone does not? They can just as easily view emails and their phone (easier with push email), and then struggle to type out a reply on their phone or wait till they get back to the office, as struggle on the iPad. After all who wants to, or can justify, spending ten minutes typing out an email that should have taken one minute?

It seems that the iPad/Slate is little more than a nice viewing screen and rather than filling a gap, actually falls between two stools.

Reincarnation

It is not the first time that we have seen these types of devices tabled as the next big thing. In 2001 they were called Tablet PCs and ran a striped down version of Windows XP, and it was Bill Gates touting them as the miracle machines. Back then touch screens were not good enough so Tablet PCs were really ‘pen enabled PCs’, at least according to Microsoft.

They never really caught on, although the industry refused to kill them off completely.

Next came Project Origami in 2006, otherwise known as the Ultra Mobile PC. The ridiculously expensive and underpowered devices oddly didn’t catch on but did demonstrate that the ‘industry’ wasn’t really sure what the consumer wanted and had misjudged badly. UMPCs are technically still going but the format is in reality, dead.

A little over a year later, it was once again demonstrated to the ‘industry’ that it was the consumer, and not they, who dictated the trends with the launch of the netbook. Netbooks became a huge and to many a surprise hit and almost single handedly kept computer sales going during the recent economic slump. Consumers couldn’t get enough of the small, low powered and cheap mini-laptops, which were almost the complete opposite of UMPCs.

The Future for the iPad

Unfortunately as history has demonstrated, there just isn’t a need for a device like this, the vast majority of users still need a keyboard most of the time. I’m sure that as usual the Apple iPad will do better than Microsoft’s/Various manufacturers Slate’s, but it still won’t do well and certainly won’t be the next big thing.

That’s not to say that there isn’t a future for these sorts of devices, just not in this form and not yet. There could be in the future a market for some kind of flexible e-ink type of wireless viewing screen that can link up to a laptop or PC so that the user can read his emails or surf the net over breakfast, dinner or in bed and still do the real work on a traditional laptop/computer. Such a device would have to be far, far cheaper however, more flexible and with a longer battery life to make it useful.

Another option could perhaps be a netbook/laptop with a detachable touch screen that can easily be slipped off for easy and comfortable viewing, and then replaced for typing. Either way, we’d still need a keyboard and far better technology than we have today.

Sadly, that means that the iPad and upcoming Slates, are nothing more than the next in a long line of dead ends and not the revolutionary devices we are led to believe.

This is hugely important to Microsoft, having lost a lot of face, and users, with the disastrous Windows Vista, this could be their last chance to prove that they are top dog when it comes to Operating Systems. If things go wrong again, then it really could signal the end of Microsoft’s dominance in the Operating System market.

Windows

The first version of Windows was released way back in 1986, but it wasn’t the dominant, or even the first Operating System to use a graphical user interface (GUI) system or ‘windows’.

Apple got there first in 1984 with their famous, and uncannily prescient, ‘1984′ advert featuring a well endowed blonde lady hurling a sledge hammer at a screen featuring a bespectacled man who represented a ubiquitous and monolithic institution. Unfortunately smashing screens only destroys computers in Hollywood, and said man and monolithic institution merely used another screen to go on to dominate the computing world.

This dominance only really came about with Windows 3.1, probably the Windows version most people remember as being the ‘first’ Windows Operating System as it was used in many workplaces, colleges and universities, which was released in 1992 and had soon given Microsoft a 90% market share. This domaince only increased with the release of Windows 95 in 1995, Windows 98 in 1998 (and Windows 98 SE in 1999) and then the dire Windows Millennium Edition (ME) and Windows 2000, both in 2000, followed the following year by Windows XP.

This was around the time when Microsoft were criticised for introducing operating systems far too often with very little changes. Hence the rather long wait (six years) until Windows Vista.

It was with Windows XP that Microsoft secured it’s largest ever market share, around 97.5% in the middle of this decade. Even today, eight years after it was released, Windows XP alone still accounts for more than 70% of the operating system market.

Vista

Vista on the other hand, despite being just 2 years old, accounts for only 22% of the market and is widely blamed for Microsoft’s market share dropping to around the 90% mark this year. But why was it such a disaster?

The criticisms are many, and to be fair cannot all be blamed on Microsoft, but the first one can – price. Vista was extremely expensive, especially for British consumers who had to pay double what US consumers paid.

Users of Vista discovered what it is like for many Linux or Mac users, when, having installed their new operating system, they discovered that their printer, scanner, and many other hardware, particularly older hardware, simply would not work. And those manufacturers that hadn’t gone out of business or disappeared since XP, simply were not interested in producing new drivers for their old hardware just for Vista users.

The lucky ones spent hours, days or even weeks tracking down the new drivers for Vista, the not so lucky ones were forced to replace their perfectly good printers, scanners and assorted hardware with new ones just to run on Vista. Others opted to downgrade back to Windows XP.

Another problem, again not entirely Microsoft’s fault was UAC (User Account Control) an attempt to make the operating system more secure, that backfired somewhat. UAC was triggered when a program needed administrator privileges to function, sadly because Microsoft previously made all users administrators in other versions of Windows, it meant all software was designed to run with administrator, rather than standard privileges, by default.

This meant that virtually all programs made the UAC pop up every few minutes, even when carrying out simple functions (add to that the Firewall and/or Antivirus pop-ups and Vista as a constant interruption!), or the programs didn’t work at all. Needless to say, soon after Vista was released guides appeared everywhere showing how to turn the damn thing off! This of course completely negated the security benefits of it. 

One of the biggest gripes about Vista was it’s performance. Many users complained that it reduced their computing to a crawl, despite having top of the range computers. Vista requirements stated that it needed 1GB of RAM and a 1GHz processor, but even those with far in excess of those requirements found it slow and unresponsive. Many netbooks for example meet Vista’s requirements, few, if any, are capable of actually running Vista.

Linux

Compare this to Linux, specifically the popular Ubuntu, which requires just a 700MHz processor and 384MB of RAM and yet offers Aero-like effects and a swift and efficient operating system; and it is easy to see why those who splashed out on an expensive new computers, that ended up being slower than their old one, were not happy.

Netbook owners discovered that they couldn’t use Microsoft’s new operating system, being forced to go back to the eight year old XP, or move to the free Linux operating system like Ubuntu. Those that did found that Ubuntu offered a faster, slicker and more stable experience than Vista and more importantly made their new PC or netbook feel like it was supposed to – new.

Apple Mac

Others still, switched to Mac, pushing Apple’s market share up beyond 5% for the first time since 1993. Apple’s OS X was also faster, slicker and much better looking than Vista, and like Linux far more secure, immune to spyware and other forms of malware.

The major downside however was that it meant purchasing a new computer, specifically to run Mac OS X, and Apple Mac’s are very expensive.

So the question is, what can Microsoft offer to compete with the free, virus immune, secure, customisable, Aero-beating effects of Ubuntu; and the secure, polished, beautiful and extremely desirable Mac OS X?

Windows 7

I have to admit, with Windows 7 they have offered a worthy competitor. Unlike Vista it is slick, fast loading and doesn’t hamstring your computer, indeed there didn’t appear to be any difference in speed between Windows XP and Windows 7 on the computer it was tested on – a netbook! Yes Windows 7 runs without any problems on a netbook, despite Windows 7 having the same hardware requirements as Vista.

There was talk of a stripped down version of Windows 7 for netbooks last year, but that now appears not to be the case, not to mention unnecessary, Windows 7 runs fine on netbooks, demonstrating that Microsoft have managed to get rid of the bloat of Vista, whilst retaining it’s look and feel. The Aero effects also ran fine on the netbook we tested.

The taskbar has been altered to something similar to Mac OS X, not in looks, but in making it simpler and easier to use. Rather than having an icon on the taskbar for each application, it now has one and displays all open windows when hovered over. Making things much simpler and productive when working with multiple applications and documents.

There are still problems however. UAC is still a nightmare. While you can install programs as an Administrator, some programs, such as anti-virus and firewall packages, don’t automatically start unless started by an administrator because of UAC. When it is disabled things run smoother, although not safer.

There is also the same driver and software problems that plagued Vista at launch, although Windows 7 hasn’t officially launched yet, but fortunately most of the time the Vista versions of the software or drivers appears to work OK.

All in all this appears to be the best and most polished release of a Windows Operating System for a long time, possibly ever, but one can’t help but wonder whether that is because Microsoft has had millions of beta testers helping to iron out the kinks for the past two years, otherwise known as Vista users.

Windows 7, good as it is, it still doesn’t quite stack up to the much more customisable and safer Ubuntu, nor the better looking and much more polished Mac OS X, it may well be too little too late for Microsoft.

Vista may well have done what the busty blonde with the hammer could not, end Microsoft as a monolithic and ubiquitous entity.

Nokia is King when it comes to mobile phones, accounting for a whopping 40% of the market worldwide. In the smartphone market Nokia are an even bigger player, with 52.9% of the market, and now being the sole owner of the Symbian Operating System means that 65% of smartphone owners worldwide use their OS

Apple iPhone accounts for just 6.5% of the smartphone market, meaning that they lag some way behind the likes of Nokia, and RIM (the makers of the Blackberry). Also surprising is that more smartphone users have Windows on their phones, than Apple’s software.

So what does all this mean?

Nokia’s N95

Well it means that Nokia know what they are doing, their N-Series of smartphones have been very popular. So popular in fact that their N95 was dubbed ‘iPhone Killer’, when it went up against the first iPhone.

A couple of months ago Apple launched their new iPhone and now Nokia is hitting back with the N96.

Nokia got it right with the N95 for many reasons, such as the GPS, 3G, and of course their microSD card expansion slot. The iPhone came with 4GB or the largest 5GB of storage space, and there was no way to expand that, a shocking omission in todays storage hungry world. The N95 was compatible with microSD cards up to 2GB, meaning that for less than £10 it was possible to even up and then better the iPhone’s storage.

Nokia’s N96

The N96 goes even further in this regard, as it had to in order to compete with the iPhone which has 16GB of internal storage. The N96 matches this, but of course has a microSD card slot and supports SDHC cards up to 16GB, giving a total storage capacity of 32GB! And that’s without swapping cards.

It’s amazing that Apple have missed this once again, the customers that this kind of phone is aimed at are going to need as much storage as possible for their MP3 and videos. Why buy a phone that stores 12,000 MP3s or 40 hours of video (iPhone) when you can have a phone that stores 24,000+ MP3s and 80+hours of video?

The iPhone, like most other Apple devices also has a built in battery, which was always going to be a problem and despite the complaints and criticism, the new iPhone has a built in battery too. Other complaints about the new iPhone are the 2 mega pixel camera, the same as the original iPhone – the N96 has a 5 mega pixel camera.

iPhone Style

The Apple of course has the edge when it comes to style, although the N96 doesn’t look half bad itself, and desirability, but this is all thanks to clever marketing. At the end of the day iPhone users are a niche market, Nokia are ahead of the game in almost all respects in the smartphone market.

Smartphone users want hot swappable expandable storage so that they can simply insert a flash memory card and access the documents, MP3s or videos on it on many different types of devices and unfortunately the Apple iPhone cannot deliver this.

Technorati Tags: Horizon Flash Memory, Memory, Storage, microSD, SDHC, Flash Card, Nokia, iPhone, N95, N96, Smartphone, Blackberry

MiniDiscs just didn’t take off, there were compatibility issues, the hardware was expensive, it wasn’t widely supported by the record labels and recordable CDs were launched around the same time.

SlotMusic

Despite this lesson from history, and the recent format war between Blu-Ray and HD-DVD, Sandisk today launced their replacement for the CD, SlotMusic.

SlotMusic is in effect a microSD memory card loaded with an album of the buyers choice. These 1GB microSD cards will also include pictures and videos and the intro video on the SlotMusic website also implies  that owners will be able to add their own documents and information to the cards, just like any other microSD card.

Pricing

As usual with these new technologies, the price remains the same. Prices are expected to be about the same as a CD, about £8.99, when SlotMusic is launched in the UK later this year. Like the price of downloads, the logic behind this is unclear. MicroSD cards are pretty cheap, Horizon Flash Memory sell 1GB microSD memory cards for just £2.99.

With microSD cards this cheap, it is possible to buy two 2GB microSD memory cards for the price of one SlotMusic album, which means that even at MP3’s highest quality (320 kbps – what SlotMusic is stored at) an owner of a 2GB microSD memory card could fit almost 30 albums of their choice on their own card (and about 60 with their two cards).

Moreover they could fit six albums stored in the far superior FLAC format (equivalent to CD quality) on their card. This does seem to make the SlotMusic format appear to be something of a waste of space.

Recent events regarding DRM in downloaded music and its removal has shown that today’s music lovers do not wish to be tied to proprietary formats, they expect portability and choice. Having just one album per card means having to change the disc over when wanting to listen to another album or when all the tracks have been played; for those used to having thousands of tracks at their finger tips, this will be seen as a major inconvenience. No matter how small microSDs are, carrying around your entire music collection on these cards is just not an option.

So why on earth does SanDisk believe there are people willing to become tied to this new format?

Compatibility

If there is one thing that SlotMusic has going for it, it is compatibility. The music is encoded as MP3s with a 320 kbps bitrate. This ensures compatibility with almost all platforms, from PCs running Windows or Linux, through to Macs. Most mobile phones will also play MP3s and most also accept microSD cards. The USB cable that also comes with the SlotMusic card ensures it can be played on almost anything, with one notable exception. Apple’s iPod/iPhone.

Creating a new music format that isn’t compatible with the world’s No.1 selling portable music player was a bit of a gamble, and to be fair the problem is more of Apple’s making rather than that of SanDisk as Apple’s iPhone and iPod have neither card slots nor USB slots.

Whoever the blames lies with, SanDisk has lost a large chunk of its potential customer base because of it.

The lack of DRM in the music means that owners can transfer their songs to their PC and then to their iPod/iPhone’s internal storage, but then they can already do that using iTunes or CDs.

Over engineering

This is course is probably the biggest flaw in the SlotMusic format. The first thing most users are going to do is copy their music from the SlotMusic card onto their PC so that they have their music collection in one place, and either then use the 1GB microSD flash memory card as spare storage, or put it on a shelf somewhere, just like they would a CD.

As with CDs, sooner or later they are going to realise that they can save time, space and effort by just downloading the music directly to their computer at which point they will stop purchasing SlotMusic altogether.

While SanDisk’s new format is a noble idea, it is in many respects a step backward and has over complicated what is becoming a quick and straightforward process – getting music onto a portable device. 

MiniDisc or sliced bread

It’s unlikely that the SlotMusic format will be the next big thing and the reactions on the web seem to confirm this:

Engadget.com
“…we half-facetiously asked SanDisk’s reps if they expected us to carry around a stack of individual microSD albums, they didn’t laugh when they said yes, and even told us that slotMusic media binders would be available at launch…”

jupiterresearch.com
The success of the format depends upon consumers opting to walk into a participating store (which may well be an issue) chose from a probably limited catalogue (anyone remember the pitiful sight of MD album sections in music shops?) and then remove their existing memory card to slot the album in. Begs the question, why wouldn’t they just download it from an online store and sideload it?

In all likelihood the SlotMusic format will disappear in the same way that SanDisk’s last attempt did back in 2005, the Gruvi TrustedFlash, which was:

“…the first removable flash memory card of its type to be sold with premium music content…”

This format too died a quiet death.

Personally I keep far more on my mobile phone’s microSD card than just music and so taking it out to play an album, which annoyingly entails removing the battery, just isn’t an option. I’d be far more likely to copy the music to my PC and then copy the whole album to my phone’s 2GB microSD card, along with all my other albums.

Of course if I am going to do that, I’d rather stick with downloads or, if I have to have the physical disc, the better quality CDs.

Judging by the reactions to this launch, I am not alone and I wouldn’t be surprised if the launch is the last we hear of SlotMusic.

Technorati Tags: SlotMusic, SanDisk, Horizon Flash Memory, microSD, MicroSD Card, Music, MP3, Flash Memory, 1GB microSD, Music Storage, Sony BMG, Universal, EMI, Warner Music, Mobile Phone