iPad disappoints some, excites others

Apple’s latest innovation, the iPad, is basically an oversized iPod Touch.

There was a lot of hype leading up to the release of Apple’s tablet computer, but since the Jan. 27 announcement of the new device it has received mixed reviews.

The iPad performs many of the same functions as an iPod Touch, iPhone or MacBook laptop computer, but the iPad is bigger than an iPod Touch and smaller than a MacBook, with it’s 9.7-inch touch screen. It definitely will not fit inside a pocket, so why not just carry around your laptop?

The features for the iPad also have several flaws:

It does not allow users to multi-task because it only runs one application at a time.

It does not have a USB port, which can make transferring files tricky.

It does not support Adobe Flash Player, so if the user is on his iPad for too long, their crops on Farmville could die.

It does not have a camera. Although most people have cameras on their phones or carry around a digital camera, it still is surprising that Apple would leave out this feature for the iPad.

Newer iPad models can fix these problems and will no doubt improve upon the original model, but as of right now, the tablet does not offer much of an incentive for people to shell out hundreds of dollars for an electronic device that is similar to their MP3 player, cell phone or laptop. Especially with the U.S. economy suffering, the majority of people cannot afford to purchase such an ineffectual luxury item.

Other companies are introducing competing products for Apple’s iPad. Archos 9 PC Tablet, HP Windows Slate and Lenovo IdeaPad U1Hybrid tablet notebook are all slated to be released later this year.

Only time will tell to what extent the tablet will impact different industries.
Apple’s iPod was not the first MP3 player, yet it is has overwhelmingly dominated the MP3 market. The same goes for iTunes when it comes to buying music online. Although the iPad has competition, it is doubtful that Apple has much to worry about with its loyal customers.

Predictions that the iPad could replace Kindle are mixed. Although it will probably negatively impact Kindle sales, book lovers will choose Kindle over the iPad because the Kindle offers fewer distractions, a longer battery life and is easier on the eyes.
With the announcement of the iPad, many journalists have speculated this could be the technology to save print media.

The New York Times already has an application for the iPad, which could be revolutionary for journalism. If customers purchase the application, they will be paying for digital journalism and boosting the sales for the publishing company.

On the iPad, The New York Times application looks like an actual newspaper and enables readers to view multiple stories at once. Readers can also view photos, play videos and save articles.

If the iPad is a hit and people decide to pay for a digital version of a newspaper then journalism can thrive in a new form. And if The New York Times application is a success, other newspapers and magazines will surely jump on board.

Not only journalists were talking about the news of the iPad; Twitter was abuzz as well. Women sent Tweets poking fun at the name for Apple’s latest product by making references to feminine hygienic products with words like iTampon, iPeriod or iPad with wings. Even the name is sending mixed reviews, possibly forecasting a bitter reception to the tablet.

Stephanie Kitchens is a second-year journalism student.