Last week wasn’t an especially good one for Apple. The iPad launch never really matched its billing – it never really could – and negative press articles translated into a wobble on the NASDAQ. The week ended with CEO Steve Jobs allegedly telling a meeting of Apple employees that Adobe was “lazy” and that Google’s ‘Don’t be evil’ motto was “a load of crap”.
Yet while it is clear that Jobs and the Apple board have a few issues to deal with the company has still announced what could prove to be the most significant computing device of the decade.
So in spite of all the negative press why do I feel this way? Well firstly the iPad was never going to match its pre-launch hype. If the company had added an OLED screen, enabled multi tasking (at the moment the device can only run on application at a time which is probably unique among PCs) and added cameras and video calling, it would have delivered a device what would have excited the blogosphere. However it might have seen its shares tumble as the iPad would have retailed for twice the price it currently is.
So Apple chose to build a lower-end device with a competitive price to match and instead delivered a product that was felt by many bloggers to be a disappointment. However the iPad is just a start of a journey for Apple and its consumers. And the irony is that if previous debut product launches from Apple are anything to go by we really shouldn’t have been too surprised that the product was underwhelming.
When Apple launched the iPod back in 2001, it was hammered for producing a device that only worked with Macs, had limited storage and was cursed with terrible battery life. By the time the third generation iPod came along, to say nothing of the iPod mini, the device had got so sexy that everyone had bought one.
Even the now ubiquitous iPhone was given mixed reviews when it launched in January 2007. Sure the critics liked its touch screen interface but the phone itself was a shadow of the type of mobile being produced in Europe and the Far East. It wasn’t even 3G, but ran using an unfashionable and slow data technology called EDGE. Of course then came the 3G phone and the app store and now the iPhone is the best selling smartphone on the planet.
So maybe Apple has a habit of getting it right third time. If that’s the case we shouldn’t be writing off then iPad until we have seen Mk 3 in two years time (or indeed the iPad mini) which by then will almost certainly multitask, sport cameras etc. It will also be very wedded to the whole iTunes/app ecosphere and will surely boast a multitude of innovative and exciting iPad apps.
Finally, content companies believe strongly in Apple. In a world of indie media, blogging, and start ups Apple clearly has very strong relationships with heritage media and has a proven track record of finding new business models for those companies.
How about this idea? Big publishing houses aren’t making enough ad money from the web, while at the same time sales of periodicals, which do attract big ad spends, are declining. If those publishers can get their periodical content to look and feel like their paper versions on electronics devices they might be able to continue to attract the big ad spend of the paper editions rather than the limited ad revenue of the web versions. To do this they need to get the best device for reading their content to as many people as quickly as possible. Hearst Publishing is already thinking along these lines with its Skiff ereader. However ultimately it might make sense for all publishers to back one platform – i.e. the iPad.
It might even enough sense for the publishing companies to subsidise the price of the iPad or even give them away for free with subscriptions to their magazines both paper and digital versions. It might not happen now, but by the time we get to version three…





Apologies for blowing our own trumpet, but I do so on behalf of people too modest to do it themselves…










