Caleb Elston

Technology, Business, Observations. 
« Back to blog

Is the iPad for Dumb People?

I did not expect to like the iPad. I didn't even expect Apple would create a tablet. The ergonomics of such a device never made sense to me. I couldn't get over the lousy text input methods or the inevitable nuisance of holding it at all times. Plus the idea of navigating Mac OSX with your finger just seemed silly. Then the iPad was demoed, and it all made sense. 

Apple didn't set out to create a tablet as other companies had in the past, the same way they didn't set out to create a phone the same way every other company had in the past. They set out to fundamentally change the way we interact with our computers. 

More on the iPad in a bit, but first some background.

I used to build computers from parts when I was 12. I would obsess over the most stable motherboards, geek out on the latest nVidia graphics cards, and study CPU benchmarks seeking the best price to performance ratio of AMD and Intel chips. All that was fun, it was a hobby, but it eventually became a chore. Reformatting and dealing with incompatibilities became frustrating once I had real work to get done. Always a PC guy, I thought Macs were for dumb people -- people who couldn't figure out computers. I overcame this prejudice when I was heading off to college and decided to buy a Mac notebook, because I didn't want to have to deal with reformatting my windows PC every 6 months and I didn't want to be chained to my desk anymore.

After a short time with my Mac I came to appreciate the affordances Macs makes for everyday tasks, it was as if the designers actually thought about the common things people do with their computers and really polished those flows. It was during this time that I stopped worrying about the details of my computer and worried more about what I could accomplish with it: browsing the web, listening to music, doing email, and writing papers. 

Fast forward a few years and I get an iPhone. The iPhone changed the way I interact with my digital stuff. Being able to access email, music, restaurant reviews, the internet, Twitter, and the like anywhere and everywhere was surreal. I take it for granted now, but  I never worry about being disconnected anymore, and I certainly don't think about what processor powers my iPhone or when (if ever) it should be reformatted. It is natural, intuitive, and gets out of the way. I can do what I want without thinking about the "computer" that the tiny device actually is.

The iPad is the next step. It takes the ideals of the Mac to their logical end. We have been stuck with a windowing UI environment for more than 30 years. It is time for change. It is time for computing to leave behind the last remaining vestiges of geekdom. Apple has seen that multi-touch interfaces are more natural and intuitive and that with iTunes and the App Store they can deliver media and apps to people quickly and easily. 

I will buy an iPad because I want the most essential way to get things done. I want the most polished and optimized experience for the tasks I want to accomplish. Apple will provide many of these, but 3rd party developers will fill the void with remarkable apps too, I have no doubt of that. I expect that all of the tasks I do at home will work even better on the iPad than on my notebook, and they will be more enjoyable to boot. It may take a few iterations of the device and software before I use an iPad at work, but I expect in time that day will come. 

The iPad is where Apple wants computing to go. It is focused, elegant, and simple. It's philosophy is centered around humans, not technology. It challenges us to rethink our assumptions of what it means to use a computer and what it takes to be productive with them. There will be resistance, of that I am sure, I expect many people will feel the way I did years ago towards Macs thinking the iPad is for "dumb people", people who can't handle a real computer. The iPad isn't for dumb people, it is for people who don't want to think about their computer anymore. And I can't wait to join that group.

Loading mentions Retweet

Comments (16)

Feb 05, 2010
Davide Di Cillo said...
Completely agree. The iPad it's just like a Prius. You don't need to know which engine you are using or what gear you are in. You just drive.
Feb 05, 2010
Caleb Elston said...
Exactly!
Feb 05, 2010
Otto said...
Sorry to break it to you, but it's not a prejudice, it's a fact. Macs still are for dumb people.

And the iPad is for people too dumb to use a mouse. The best they can do is to point at stuff and drool.

Feb 05, 2010
If your definition of smart is people who like to dick around with the minutiae of hardware and operating systems all day then you're not half as smart as you think. Intelligence can be applied in infinite ways, and if you can't accept that then you deserve every wedgie you got in high school.
Feb 05, 2010
John Baptist said...
The iPad isn't a computer; it's a consumer appliance, like a toaster or a washing machine. This is what Apple has always wanted to do. They've never been interested in making general-purpose computing tools, but rather in making tools that allow them to dictate to the unwashed masses how they will do their work. It's up to you if you think you need to be told by Steve Jobs what apps your're allowed to use, which carrier to use, which plugins, and under precisely which conditions. I'll choose freedom.
Feb 05, 2010
Stammy said...
it is for people who don't want to think about their computer anymore"

Spot on! I have very much the same background - building computers from scratch when I was younger, modding cases, competing in benchmarking/overclocking competitions (got a top spot on futuremark hall of fame 3dmark03 for a short period in the summer of 2004 haha). Then I went to college and got a Mac Mini at the end of my freshman year. Then a MacBook, then an iMac, then a MacBook Pro, then a MacBook Air, then a unibody MacBook Pro.. then a 17-inch unibody MacBook Pro. Guess you could say I am now a fanboy. :-)

Feb 05, 2010
Geoff Canyon said...
I say much the same thing at: http://gcanyon.wordpress.com/2010/02/04/the-ipad-revolution-its-1984-all-over-again/

Apple is trying to do the same thing today to the mouse/window interface that they did in 1984 to the command line interface. That transition took about ten years (depending on whether you take Windows 3 or 95 as the final nail in ms dos's coffin) and this one probably won't go much faster. The question is: will Apple or Android be standing tall at the end of the transition?

Feb 05, 2010
Caleb Elston said...
Stammy thanks for the kind words. Sounds like we had a similar path. Can't wait to get my hands on an iPad.
Feb 05, 2010
Bill Grant said...
I'm all for making life simpler for people who don't want to think about computers, but why can't we have it both ways? I've been using a Macbook (and Mac Mini) for 3 years now and I get a nice clean interface for most of my tasks, and a UNIX-based terminal and programming environment for when I want to get under the covers. I can install whatever application I want.

Now if I want to install an application on my iPad or iPhone I need to be in a $99/year developer program and my application needs to be approved by Apple. Why can't I write some software and email my friends the app? I can do that on Android.

Of course the reason is because Apple wants to monetize it -- whether it is from my developer fee or from any paid apps I build. It's not about being concerned about the users, because Grandma isn't going to get an emailed application and install it herself.

Feb 05, 2010
Will Foran said...
@Otto and mice are for people too "dumb" to use the keyboard: "point and drool."
I've found the Mac environment to be cumbersome and assuming. The interface is intuitive, having virtually no learning curve, and constant, but, if your work flow deviates from what it prescribes, you'll be jumping through hoops. Additionally, you pay for the design with restrictions. Your files do what it wants you to do with them rather than what you want to do with them.
For those introduced to computing this way (e.g. people I live with), the paradigm is that applications store files, not some abstract thing like the hard drive. To people trained this way, music is inside iTunes. Documents are inside Word. This maybe a more effective exemplar and may yield productive work flows relative to the prerequisite knowledge, but -like a manual transmission compared to an automatic - it requires less thought and is not as powerful. This is what I think is in the connotation of dumber. In this way, the iPad is dumb, the same as a windowed mouse-driven environment is dumb. Shell/terminal, vim, and titled windows management are less dumb.
Feb 05, 2010
Danny said...
@Will Foran: your analogy reminded me of an interesting bit of information I read in a car magazine a few years ago. It said that less than 5% of the people who drove cars with manual transmissions could achieve the performance or fuel efficiency of modern automatic transmissions, but 100% of people who drove manual transmissions thought that they were in that top 5%. I think there is the same mentality with PC "power users".
Feb 05, 2010
Venkatesh said...
I'm probably not sure about this, but for the second time(after the iPhone), Apple might know where this is going.

The only problem is that being creative with Apple products is a joke, a farce. They want to control what, when and how you're using their products.
That is what is keeping Apple alive. That is what is killing the rest of us.

Feb 06, 2010
Brian said...
@Venkatesh I don't understand your inability to be creative with Apple products. I use SuperCollider, Garage Band, Audacity on my Macs to make digital music. I write complicated visualizations with Processing and Adobe Flex. All on the Mac. And I don't feel the least bit constrained -- only free from reformatting and rebuilding my system every six months. Plus: Unix with a candy coating.

I can say the same thing to @Will Foran - Why do you feel constrained? Do you miss the Windows Registry? Do you miss fiddling with your X Windows configuration to get just the right refresh and sync rates for your monitor?

Feb 07, 2010
Mitchell Geere said...
The first thing I want to know is what is up with these folks who like to slate something and then run-away without leaving a business card. Don't worry no one will hunt you down for having an opinion.

I agree with this article, I want, no need, my devices to be seamless. I don't want to have to worry about anything other than what I want to achieve. I have been a designer and developer for a pretty long time and have seen what a developer deems a good user experience - it's not productive nor the kind of experience you'd want for 8 x 5.

They are more focussed on fine tuning their machines and running the numbers for completely inconsequential things than doing what they have to.

Here in South Africa just about 90% of the country drive manual cars, I grew up driving them. I haven't driven one in a long time, I don't get the point. I'm not a rally driver, or a offroader I don't need to balance my clutch just so slightly that it will mean defeat or victory over some arbitrary challenge. I drive to work, to social events and so on, I drive to arrive at the place not to drive for the sake of driving. Enjoying the smoothness of my clutch and the shift. If I want to be racy I can put it into manual or sports mode but essential my reason for driving is to get to a destination.

That same argument goes for UI's that allow you to accomplish your job vs. you fiddling so that eventually you can do your job in just the right way that makes your hair tingle. Your employer or client doesn't care about you wanting to drive manually they want you to get to your destination and that is the report, design, application, or whatever you do to be completed and as quick as possible.

I think Apple in most cases do this perfectly their work machines are automatics with the option of going manual. Then their other devices are more targeted think smart car vs. any other you have enough to accomplish what it was designed to. It solve a particular problem, if you don't have that problem don't buy the device. The iPad for me solves a problem where I wanted something that feels and looks good on which I can read digital books. I expected nothing more, the problem is people expected a full tablet pc, Apple haven't created a tablet PC they created a larger personal device that assists your main machine but will never become it.

Feb 07, 2010
Bill Grant said...
I don't have a problem that they didn't put a full OS X on the iPad.... I agree that the iPhone OS is very clean and right for this kind of task.

But I'm still not hearing good counterpoints to why one (technical or not) wouldn't want a device that:
1) Uses Flash. It seems the biggest complaint is Flash's stability. Has anyone used Google Chrome on a site where Flash crashed? It didn't hurt stability of the rest of the browsing experience at all. In fact it looks the same as Flash looks like now on an iPhone - inoperable. (And personally I've never had an issue with Flash on Hulu EVER. And I watch a lot of shows on Hulu.)
2) Has background apps. Has anyone here tried an Android phone or a Pre? If you had you would be upset you are missing this feature.
3) Install anything. This one won't matter to non-technical types, but there seems to be no reason Apple doesn't allow developers to write applications themselves and for their friends without hacking the device. I don't have a problem with them monetizing the app store but for regular development I've always appreciated their open model for OS X and I wish they would have continued it for the iPhone OS.

I guess the whole point is -- why can't we have our cake and eat it too? Why do people think it is so hard to implement. Put a toggle in settings called "Casual User vs. Developer" and be done with it.

Feb 08, 2010
Will Foran said...
@Danny: that's interesting and probably still within the analog. Hopefully there are a higher percent of successfully efficient power users than manual drivers.
@Brian: X configuration often "just works" (via HAL [?]), but it isn't limited to this automatic configuration. I have a multiple board/head set up (zaphod mode) that I've configured through the appropriate text file. Whether this setup or the ability to have this setup actually make me productive is debatable, it speaks to powerful flexibility, to a system that is not dumb.
Configuration, (beyond superficial) customization, and modularity are less accessible (no text file!) through dumb systems. I miss this; the lack is endlessly frustrating. I want tasks to conform to me. ...Of course, I do not always know best, and interfaces that force me to do something one way often teach a better solution.Still, I prefer choice.

Leave a comment...

 
Got an account with one of these? Login here, or just enter your comment below.
Posterous-login    twitter