Will the iPad Foster Passive Viewers and Control Innovation?
Beyond the noise, real-time blogging from Apple stores and videos of people opening the box of their new iPad, (seriously, the NY Times posted such a video) there are some important questions about the direction the iPad is taking developers and in effect consumers. Will the platform spur new innovation? Innovation for developers of video programming, Transmedia Storytelling and other applications (not just Apps), or will it be a one-way consumption only device, a device where Apple sets all the ground rules for both users as well as developers?
The term economic moat coined by Warren Buffet refers to one companies competitive advantage over another, in this regard Apple is employing all its resources fair and not so fair to keep invading armies (Google, Microsoft and their hardware partners) out. Some of the areas that define an economic moat consist of;
Branding
This is where the iPad (and to a much larger extent Apple) has been very effective, drawing on the companies excellent communication skills in video and print advertising to create a desire or perceived need for the device even if its daily use may be undefined by some of the people purchasing the product. Apple has created strong brands with great UI's and form-factors, the Mac Book Pro is as beautiful as it is functional and strong.
Low cost
With a starting price of $500, the iPad can not be thought of as an impulse purchase or even low cost by consumer purchasing criteria - but pre-order and first day sales would contradict that notion, is it brand loyalty, being the first on your subway car to have one, great marketing, offering a true transformative product, all of the above or some combination? The question is, will people once they've spend a couple of months with the device continue to think they got a bargain and will Apple need to become more competitive as similar devices enter the market, will consumers feel they overpaid?
Product differentiation
If it looks like an e-Reader and walks like a large iPod and quakes like a DVD player, is it an iPad? I've not had time to stroll into an Apple store, no doubt I'll venture by this coming week to touch, feel and do some people watching. But since I'm not the target audience it does not really matter, what will matter is the student, housewife or even the faithful who dropped their hard earned dollars on the device, will it meet their requirements and will it replace the Kindle or Netbook? In the case of the Kindle it does one thing but it does it really, really well. In the case of a Netbook you can get a lot more for $500.00.
Tim Bray, XML co-inventor who recently became a Developer Advocate at Google, for the Android said,
"The iPhone vision of the mobile Internet's future omits controversy, sex, and freedom, but includes strict limits on who can know what and who can say what. It's a sterile Disney-fied walled garden surrounded by sharp-toothed lawyers. The people who create the apps serve at the landlord's pleasure and fear his anger."
Apple's legal tactics might be phrased as: create, then litigate. Tim Bray has a good story about patents and computer software worth reading. While Apple is pursuing a legal tact, it is singing the songs of open standards for HTML5 which is sees as a more stable and easier partner to dance with then Adobe - not withstanding that the final specification is years away.
APP Developer Control?
"There is nothing wrong with your television set. Do not attempt to adjust the picture. We are controlling transmission. If we wish to make it louder, we will bring up the volume. If we wish to make it softer, we will tune it to a whisper. We will control the horizontal. We will control the vertical. We can roll the image, make it flutter. We can change the focus to a soft blur or sharpen it to crystal clarity. For the next hour, sit quietly and we will control all that you see and hear."
Did this classic '60's TV series portent the kind of control that Apple would have over developers of Apps as well as consumers who purchase them?
In their March 9th article, All Your Apps Are Belong to Apple: The Electronic Frontier Foundation cited the iPhone Developer Program License Agreement, a one-sided contract outlining the terms of creating an Apps, among the passages, the following was rather disturbing.
In his blog, Cory Doctorow has crafted a well reasoned article about why the Apple iPad is actually an impediment to innovation, in creating a passive only viewing experience (at least for now) In it, he cited William Gibson, master craftsman of such books as Pattern Recognition and Neuromancer.
Transmedia StoryTelling
When discussing the pending release of the iPad at the recent Cross Media conference in New York City, Jeff Gomez, CEO of Starlight Runner Entertainment alluded to the current limitation of the device as not allowing for transmedia storytelling, this since there is no ability to multi-task between applications. Jeff however, was of the opinion this would change over time.
Consumption Only, Verses Creation
Is the iPad a consumption only device? Certainly the inability to multi-task between applications limits user control as well as the inability to install programs of the users choosing, aside from Apps. I could see using in the field to capture video from Firewire or use to download and capture photographs into Adobe Lightroom for tagging and future editing, no such luck.
In his blog, Daring Fireball, John Gruber writes about a 13 year old app developer
"He's 13 years old and he has created (with the help of his friend, 14-year-old designer Louis Harboe) and is selling an iPad app in the same store where companies like EA, Google, and even Apple itself distribute iPad apps. His app is ready to go on the first day the product is available. Not a fake app. Not a junior app. A real honest-to-god iPad app. Imagine a 13-year-old in 1978 who could produce and sell his own Atari 2600 cartridges."
"Somehow I don't think young Mr. Kaplan sees the iPad as hurting his sense of wonder or entrepreneurism."
This is a valid point and one in which an entrepreneurial young man was able to create an app with any or all of the features and functionalities afforded to a developer which the iPhone and iPad are capable of running - that the developer was not able to open the case and add to the device did not detract from his goal.
Mr. Gruber however, goes on to suggest that the iPad as web-client somehow is an open device for developers of web-based content. However, that's simply creating web-based content for any Internet capable device, it does not make the iPad more useful in this case. An aspiring Indie creative could build a site to deliver QT or HTML5 video wrapped UI content specifically for the iPad however, on-line monitization being what it is with ROI for an undefined audience would be a big gamble at this point in time.
So, what will the iPad mean for the future of media consumption? what does it mean for content creation? Will Apple open the platform to allow for applications and interoperability between those applications or Apps for Transmedia Storytelling? What does it mean for mobile platforms, e-Readers, slates and most importantly what will it mean for users of the iPad, will it make their lives easier and fill a need, a void better then what is already on the market, the iPod succeed because it was a truly transformative product I am not yet convinced about the iPad.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=2f07cf19-4464-4205-9bf8-adeb84aefb70)
