Everybody else is doing it….The Apple Newton….er I mean the IPad

No, I’m not implying that Apple’s new IPad is like the Newton. But I am trying to remind readers of something…..

Apple has been a leader in “bleeding edge” technology for a long time. I remember while in college sitting in a political science course with Dr. Don Davison, the guy sitting next to me was using a Newton. Unfortunately for the Newton, it was way too early for most folks to adopt. It had a limited following, but that did not mean it wasn’t an amazing technology for the time.  I think that was around 1990 or 91′.  Wow!

Now, here’s Apple again with another advance in portable computing. Will it replace my laptop? Nope. Desktop? Nope. But that doesn’t mean that this device won’t be adopted.  As a matter of fact, I bet Apple will sell the tar out of these this year.  Will I be getting one?

Not yet.

Now, some of my favorite tech bloggers are out there very excited about the IPad.  Reading Kelby’s site this morning he admonished the “feature counters” out there, and reminded all of us that folks didn’t think the IPhone would fly.  Scott has a point, but that point still won’t get me to get an IPad yet.  A few years ago when I worked in the wireless industry and had plenty of disposable income I would have gotten one immediately.  Now owning my own business and being on a super tight budget, anything I buy has to be extremely useful!

The IPad is a very cool device!  However, I need “multi-use” devices, I live in an Airstream.  Almost every piece of technology that I own is used for more than one purpose.  For the time being, the IPad isn’t it for me.  If it had more storage space, a multi-tasking capability, etc., it would be on my radar screen.  Could you imagine using it to off load images in the field?  That screen would be amazing.  A Lightroom App for the IPad combined with more storage space would make this a must have device for me almost immediately.

Oh, and the final issue that keeps me from adopting the IPhone or IPad.  Internet service via AT&T.  Didn’t you work for them on the networking side Rich?  Why yes, I did, and I was proud to work for them. The AT&T network has been disappointing people in my area for years.  3G in Prescott?  Nope.  We’re too small.  Dropped calls, dropped network connections?  Yup.  I so wish that the IPad’s network service would be selectable by end users, not predetermined.

So yes, Apple has released an cool new device.  And I won’t be getting the first generation version.  Now, with a few improvements you’ll find one in my Airstream.  I figure I’ll wait for the second generation version!  Until gen 2, I’ll keep using my IPod Touch, just love that device!

10 Comments

  1. Betsy wrote:

    Really!! AT&T. Bummer. I was really excited about this IPad until I heard this. I want a smartphone and when I heard about the IPad thought I could get that and just keep my own phone but that AT&T thing is disturbing.
    .-= Betsy´s last blog ..New Year’s Resolution cont. =-.

    Thursday, January 28, 2010 at 08:31 | Permalink
  2. Jason wrote:

    It’s not just Prescott – Denver, NYC, and many metropolitan areas where you’d think coverage would be more than sufficient is just not adequate. They may have the name, but Verizon is spanking AT&T with coverage maps for 3G service. I had so many issues with AT&T a while back, I left as soon as my contract was up. With Verizon, I can’t wait to be eligible for an upgrade to get the Droid or iPhone – contract or not. The coverage is awesome and I’ve not had a dropped call yet…

    About the only thing the AT&T angle has going for it is no contract and relatively cheap monthly rates for the data plans…

    Thursday, January 28, 2010 at 09:34 | Permalink
  3. You know, if the price point on the 64GB version was a little lower, and if there was a CF card reader……..

    Ah, what am I saying? :) Well, maybe someday Apple will team up with Verizon. That would make things a great deal more attractive!

    Thursday, January 28, 2010 at 10:05 | Permalink
  4. Mike Young wrote:

    I suspect that Apple will once again improve the specs just before product release. The iPad is not a phone but the APIs allow for VOIP apps, so that too probably won’t be too far off. For photographers, it doesn’t seem so far fetched to envision a wireless networked connection between the camera and the iPad. Many Canon and Nikon models already have that capability with the iPhone OnOne DSLR Remote app that uses a laptop as an intermediate device to initiate the network. Couldn’t that activity be handled by a simple, small dedicated device? Rich, you could design one.

    Thursday, January 28, 2010 at 11:23 | Permalink
  5. James wrote:

    The Newton was 1992-3. I know because I had one! It was ahead of its time. It always annoyed me that Apple never did anything with it. It annoyed me even more when I found out that Palm had taken the technology and made something out of it. Then I went and bought one.

    I’m also in complete agreement with you on this. I really don’t see the appeal of the iPad at this point, either. Imo, a netbook computer is a better option than the iPad, albeit not as visually appealing.

    As far as 3G coverage, I stuck with an old Treo 700p on Verizon for a long time, denying myself the iPhone, because AT&T coverage here in NJ is very spotty. Interestingly, now that I got the Motorola Droid, I have no desire to purchase the iPhone at all. (I’m very impressed with the Android OS.)

    Thursday, January 28, 2010 at 12:42 | Permalink
  6. Tony wrote:

    At least Apple did not lock this device into AT&T! When T-Mobile releases micro sim cards available you will be able to use it on their network. I imagine that Apple would love to bring their devices to Verizon, however Verizon usually wants to much control over the device! This is in direct conflict of Apple operating model! However, with Verizons recent release of the Droid platform, they have shown they are able to give up that control! I’m sure we will see these devices on Verizon within the next year!

    Thursday, January 28, 2010 at 14:13 | Permalink
  7. I’ve been thinking about getting a portable camera off loading device someday. Like the Colorspace UDMA reader for instance.

    I could see an IPad in my future at 64GB, a slightly lower price, etc. Wonder if there will be a Lightroom app for it….?

    Well, like I said, second generation for me.

    Thursday, January 28, 2010 at 15:20 | Permalink
  8. Josh wrote:

    The lack of flash support was the deal breaker for me… Adobe and Apple need to learn how to play nice.

    Also, I really don’t see Apple ever going to Verizon. Verizon has there own app./music store, why would they want people to use iTunes?
    .-= Josh´s last blog ..Finally Some Snow =-.

    Thursday, January 28, 2010 at 17:52 | Permalink
  9. You know Josh, I totally overlooked the Flash issue. You’re right, they do need to play nice.

    Thursday, January 28, 2010 at 19:30 | Permalink
  10. Mike Young wrote:

    Flash sucks big time and doesn’t play nice with apps, which is why Apple excludes it from iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad. The issue has been discussed at length for well over a year. See, for example, http://daringfireball.net/2010/01/apple_adobe_flash

    Also, the push by Google (YouTube) and Apple is toward the HTML5 standard rather than proprietary Flash.

    Friday, January 29, 2010 at 00:17 | Permalink

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *
*
*

Please copy the string r8ur1p to the field below:

CommentLuv badge