Future Shock
Friday, January 29, 2010 at 10:39AM I'll have more to say on the iPad later but one can't help being struck by the volume and vehemence of apparently technologically sophisticated people inveighing against the iPad.
Some are trying to dismiss these ravings by comparing them to certain comments made after the launch of the iPod in 2001: "No wireless. Les space than a Nomad. Lame.". I fear this January-26th thinking misses the point.
What you're seeing in the industry's reaction to the iPad is nothing less than future shock.
For years we've all held to the belief that computing had to be made simpler for the 'average person'. I find it difficult to come to any conclusion other than that we have totally failed in this effort.
Secretly, I suspect, we technologists quite liked the idea that Normals would be dependent on us for our technological shamanism. Those incantations that only we can perform to heal their computers, those oracular proclamations that we make over the future and the blessings we bestow on purchasing choices.
Ask yourself this: in what other walk of life do grown adults depend on other people to help them buy something? Women often turn to men to help them purchase a car but that's because of the obnoxious misogyny of car dealers, not because ladies worry that the car they buy won't work on their local roads. (Sorry computer/car analogy. My bad.)
I'm often saddened by the infantilising effect of high technology on adults. From being in control of their world, they're thrust back to a childish, mediaeval world in which gremlins appear to torment them and disappear at will and against which magic, spells, and the local witch doctor are their only refuges.
With the iPhone OS as incarnated in the iPad, Apple proposes to do something about this, and I mean really do something about it instead of just talking about doing something about it, and the world is going mental.
Not the entire world, though. The people whose backs have been broken under the weight of technological complexity and failure immediately understand what's happening here. Those of us who patiently, day after day, explain to a child or colleague that the reason there's no Print item in the File menu is because, although the Pages document is filling the screen, Finder is actually the frontmost application and it doesn't have any windows open, understand what's happening here.
The visigoths are at the gate of the city. They're demanding access to software. they're demanding to be in control of their own experience of information. They may not like our high art and culture, they may be really into OpenGL boob-jiggling apps and they may not always share our sense of aesthetics, but they are the people we have claimed to serve for 30 years whilst screwing them over in innumerable ways. There are also many, many more of them than us.
People talk about Steve Jobs' reality distortion field, and I don't disagree that the man has a quasi-hypnotic ability to convince. There's another reality distortion field at work, though, and everyone that makes a living from the tech industry is within its tractor-beam. That RDF tells us that computers are awesome, they work great and only those too stupid to live can't work them.
The tech industry will be in paroxysms of future shock for some time to come. Many will cling to their January-26th notions of what it takes to get "real work" done; cling to the idea that the computer-based part of it is the "real work".
It's not. The Real Work is not formatting the margins, installing the printer driver, uploading the document, finishing the PowerPoint slides, running the software update or reinstalling the OS.
The Real Work is teaching the child, healing the patient, selling the house, logging the road defects, fixing the car at the roadside, capturing the table's order, designing the house and organising the party.
Think of the millions of hours of human effort spent on preventing and recovering from the problems caused by completely open computer systems. Think of the lengths that people have gone to in order to acquire skills that are orthogonal to their core interests and their job, just so they can get their job done.
If the iPad and its successor devices free these people to focus on what they do best, it will dramatically change people's perceptions of computing from something to fear to something to engage enthusiastically with. I find it hard to believe that the loss of background processing isn't a price worth paying to have a computer that isn't frightening anymore.
In the meantime, Adobe and Microsoft will continue to stamp their feet and whine.
Reader Comments (286)
ok, maybe we should start to see two groups here, and end the polarizing. There is one group that Fraser talks about, that could actually do with a lot less computing, and for those the iPad in its presented incarnation might indeed offer a giant step forward in terms of usability.
However, on the other side are people who most of the time actually know what they are doing on their computer, or simply would like to drag and drop information from one program window to the other and are simply completely out of luck with the iPad. Or I, for example, I expected something with the power of OS X, but without the bulk (yes we have come far enough in terms of hardware to speak of an 13" machine as 'bulk') that I can actually throw in my rucksack without doubling its weight, and that nevertheless allows me to run Logic, FinalCut, drag and drop media between them and other applications, run, as I do currently, MatLab, XCode for Java, Dreamweaver, CyberDuck and a few other gimmicks and drag and drop files between them. What would have been a one-step operation by dragging a file from the finder to my ftp client would be accomplished exactly how under the iPad paradigm? LIke WS_FTP????
It's ok to make it simpler for a certain group of computer users, but why slam the door in the faces of us so-called power-users (who feel powerless more often than they'd care to admit, I'm sure - at least I do) and tell us to feel dirty and contemptuous just because we want to do more with our computers than just fill in some forms? Give us the ability to switch between two versions of the OS, one easy for people who are content with one app (like Windoze 3.1), and one advanced form that is simply the current incarnation of OS X. I don't want to be stuck with honking big laptops forever, dammit! And give me stylus input! Well, we have it, thanks pogo and Ink. But it's also kept in the background in shame, like the last 3000 or so years of cultural evolution of handwriting never happened.
Who is infantilizing whom? This piece is confused. Apple's UI methodology is insulting. For example, Apple uses a one button mouse because they don't think the average user is competent enough to learn how to use two buttons. Anyone who has used a two button mouse can verify the utility of two buttons. Apple makes superficial technology that neglects the fundamental human capacity to learn and adapt to new tools.
@Fraser I get the "Real Work" aspect, I honestly do, and I feel the enthusiasm, optimism and energy that pours out of a device that really breaks from the pack and makes a move in a new direction; I also feel that the iPad may become a truly memorable computer in the history of popular computing. The thing about all this right now though, is that I think the wider conversation right now muddles the "place in history" with the contemporary argument about how original or powerful the device is or how well it substitutes for machine/appliance X; and to be fair, whatever place in history the iPad merits it's a lovely innovation.
Is it lovely enough to warrant buying when PC's (albeit with their many failings) are ubiquitous and already paid for?
The iPad feels like a vanguard device, but I don't think it has the same competetive lead that the iPhone had over the competition, but who knows, maybe it can generate 'the love' and it'll be everywhere!
I wish it well, I'm not buying one of course, but I've no objection to it becoming the item everyone else has!
Ok, for all of you 'bbbbut it doesn't do <fill in the blank>', here's what even my iPhone does do for me that your netbook or Mac Pro doesn't...
- I go out at night and easily point it to the starts and see every constellation, star, planet or galaxy pointed out to me.
- I point it at a shirt in a store and it tells me (color blind as I am) what color it is.
- It tells me how far from the hole I am in my round of golf
- It lets me snap the picture of the giant bubble maker in the park to show my kids
- It gives me graphic feed back as to the pitch accuracy of my daugher's flute playing and my wife's violin.
- it lets me know the comps on that barcoded item in front of me in the store.
- Lets me sketch the painting in the museum as it sit contemplating it.
I could go on for half an hour, but the point is that NONE of these things are things I or most people are going to drag a general purpose computer along to do, even if they do do them.
The portable format, like it or not, has just made computers FAR more useful than they've every been because they're not solving specific problems.
The iPad will cover swaths that the iPhone doesn't... things that need a bigger palette.
But the author hit the nail on the head, because the computer priesthood has just lost the spotlight.
So sad.
And who says a physical keyboard is better, given the horrible typos in my post above.
' because they ARE solving specific problems'
BTW, are all of you who are griping about multi-tasking really that dense to not understand that the functionality will be available when Apple determines that its hardware can provide it in a way they can support and stand behind?
Don't like it, get a Nexus (but be sure you get the app that you'll need to shut down runaway apps.)
Patience is a lost virtue. Guess what... you're not going to get the 2012 model of the iPad until... oh about 2012.
Deal with it.
@Zosima...
I really can't take this. Are you really that ignorant that you don't know that the Mac mouse has support right click for years?
I don't know if the iPad is the answer, but I will agree with your assessment of us as computer technologists.
As one who spend most of more than 25 years developing tools on Unix systems, once I became a macintosh user I came to recognize that most of my colleagues "never met a human". I realized we had gotten very good at distorting our bodies / minds to use very bizarrely designed tools and thinking they were wonderful.
It is amazing how hard it is to use a computer to actually do what it is you're trying to do, it it's not "use the computer". At some point I began to say aloud: "With Unix, it doesn't matter what you want to do, there's something else you have to do first!" I switched to the mac from DOS, so I never got used to Windows, and find it almost impossible to actually accomplish anything with a Windows system, simply because the developers apparently think about the world somewhat differently than I do.
Somehow, if I want to draw a picture with my grandson, I don't think I'm likely to reach for a computer to do it with. Perhaps the iPad can change that.
Agreed regarding the importance of a computer being a tool to solve a problem or aid the human. This seems to be an essay in the importance of simplicity. While I wouldn't earmark a corporate launch as any more historic than a patent approval or napkin sketch (by any number of pad concepts FYI), this is a historic moment in the public acknowledgement that a better experience is needed.
"Those of us who patiently, day after day, explain to a child or colleague that the reason there's no Print item in the File menu is because, although the Pages document is filling the screen, Finder is actually the frontmost application and it doesn't have any windows open, understand what's happening here."
This isn't a very good example of why we should trust Apple to make computers easier, because this issue is obviously specific to APPLE'S OPERATING SYSTEM!
This has to be one of the best things I've read regarding the iPad. Great article, Fraser!!!
The Real Work is not formatting the margins, installing the printer driver, uploading the document, finishing the PowerPoint slides, running the software update or reinstalling the OS.
The Real Work is teaching the child, healing the patient, selling the house, logging the road defects, fixing the car at the roadside, capturing the table's order, designing the house and organising the party.
Oh, and not being able to multitask on a machine that can perform multiple tasks was pathetic in 1995; in 2010, it's INEXCUSABLE, PERIOD, END OF SENTENCE.
You fanbois think a 1Ghz chip and 256MB+ RAM (the iPad must have at least as much as the iPhone) can't handle full multitasking?! How come Apple programs don't have this problem? I hope you realize you're vehemently defending one of the most transparent cash-grabs (It'll maybe probably have this feature next year, right?) possible.
What surprise me that all those critics look at a new device and instead of enjoying something new and thinking how they could improve it or find new use for the device, even make money from it, they sit down and write articles about how they will never buy it and it will never be successful because it does not fit one of millions of uses they imagined it should be used for. They somehow missed the point that the device has a number of uses and it seem to be perfect for that. Currently there does not seem to be similar touchscreen device available on the market. Why would you care that the device does not have camera? I have one on my Mac Book and have not used it much often, never when I'm out in cafe. If you need camera on it then just wait or buy a competing device (I'm sure there's one) and hope that it will do other tasks as well.
Even us computer literates would agree that the task is not to tinker with printers or software updates, that stuff should just work (there are IT people who happily take care of that for a fee). We, software developers, want to focus on developing real world software for people who have no idea how computers work. We want devices like iPad so that we can write software for it. We want our software to be accessible from iPad device mounted on walls or while user walks around office, supermarket or art gallery. I bet the most enjoying stuff is to get our software to work and the most annoying is to figure out how to get it out to users and make sure that it runs on devices that users expect it to run on - here comes the whole Apple ecosystem with AppStore and Mac OS X - another reason Apple devices are so successful, they are not standalone devices but they fit into ecosystem.
I could not have said it better:
Can't agree enough. When my colleagues discuss it the only response I had was "It is not for you".
But But But but...it doesn't excuse the fact that to tinker, to change, to OWN the machine one would have to break the law and break the machine, that is not right.
Apple could build what they have and still allow access to the platform, the machine, they haven't for a reason and the reason is not benevolence or simplicity. And of course closed, consumer only machines aren't directed at the tech community as we would reject them vociferously. This way they can sneak this sort of shoddy, freedom hating under the noses of the ignorant, which is why they are the target of this cynical machine.
It can be all you say it is AND STILL ALLOW ME TO INSTALL WHAT I WANT ON IT. And you know that.
Great post.
I work trying to embed ICT into teaching and learning in schools and the main frustration is the slow take-up of technology. It requires considerable cultural change to implement things like learning platforms and other applications mainly because technology is so damned complicated from the user's perspective. IN many cases it requires extensive CPD and heavy ongoing tech support
Can't help thinking that if things functioned more like iPod Touch/ iPad etc the cultural change required would be nowhere near as onerous. If my 5year old can find her way round a device that's the approach we need to take.
Bravo! I am sick to death of intelligent friends (my age- 60+) claiming they don't/won't need to learn new technology who then call me to ask in a most roundabout way to look something or other up for them online. Let's face it, it's fear, plain & simple. Fear of faiing at something their grandkids are whizzes at. Pathetic. I'm starting several off with senior plan iphones. They seem to be less intimidated by them. The size, perhaps? Next step will be an ipad, I hope.
Got a computer for the first time when retired a few yrs ago. Between my ignorance...Vista Ultimate...and Comcast...havent had a prayer. My brain still works thanks to extensive education...but am totally fed up with it and intend to give Apple a look. Will take my time...as the Buddists say: if happiness is in my destiny...no need to hurray. Find your perspective right on spot!
Well said indeed! Completely agree with you. An interesting article you may find worth reading is The Music Void's report of the reliability of Apple's devices, as it seems style has overlapped substance. Another example of the more successful something becomes the lazy it gets also? http://bit.ly/aML9UT
Just what I´ve been saying for 15 years. Hail to you.
This boy can write.
Very well put. It does feel good to read something put out by someone with actual brains.
Nice stuff. Keep it up (on your iPad maybe ;))
note - I know you're not a boy.
:)
The Real Work is teaching the child, healing the patient, selling the house, logging the road defects, fixing the car at the roadside, capturing the table's order, designing the house and organising the party.
I quite agree with all of this. But I have a few questions...
Is the iPad touch tough enough to cope with being outdoors or being dropped on the floor like many of the devices already used by people working outdoors? Have the companies that make the software for those devices made any commitment to producing something for the AppStore?
Will it work on a wired network that hospitals always use. Do Apple approve its use in a clinical environment? How many of the companies who already make tablet software for medical use have commited to producing something for the AppStore?
Why would someone coming up with a solution for taking orders opt for the iPad when they could build for an Android tablet and get a larger variation of devices that do more for less money?
Why would someone in an architectural practice choose this over something like the Lenovo X-Series Tablet which not only gives them a larger screen, allows them to design software using a whole load of pre-existing design software, but also allows them to use it as a full PC if they want to?
The simple fact is that none of this is going to happen with Apple's AppStore. Firstly, serious work is fundamentally Windows and not Mac. And secondly, no-one wants to spend millions designing a serious App only to have Apple reject it from the AppStore (which Apple can do without reason).
In the meantime, Adobe and Microsoft will continue to stamp their feet and whine.
They'll be laughing their asses off when someone who'd been told that they're getting "the best browsing experience" finds out that they can't play Farm Ville, or view any video site that doesn't support HTML5?
You talk about people not having to know about technology, and that's a good thing, but how's Apple doing with that? What is the expectation of this device with regards to browsing and Flash? I've got technophobic friends who play Farm Ville and send e-greeting cards to each other and they couldn't care less about the technology that makes it happen (and rightly so). But they will expect it to work. What are they going to do when a friend sends them a link to an icanhazcheezeburger video, only to find that because it's hosted by Viddler, that they can't play it?
What happens when they can't print something they've seen on a recipe web site? You're saying that they're going to have to get up, go to their main PC, boot it up, log in and copy across the URL? I can see that being popular.
"Is the iPad touch tough enough to cope with being outdoors or being dropped on the floor like many of the devices already used by people working outdoors? Have the companies that make the software for those devices made any commitment to producing something for the AppStore?"
Will it work on a wired network that hospitals always use. Do Apple approve its use in a clinical environment? How many of the companies who already make tablet software for medical use have commited to producing something for the AppStore?
As to it's toughness we won't know that till it's actually out in distribution but few of those computers came that way they have all been altered with speciall designed casings something the US military has already begun looking into for the experimental apps they have designed for the iPhone so I would wager the same could be done for these cases as well. As for have any signed on yet harder to know but there is the possability as Johnson and johnson has been marketing their blood glucose monitoring app since the 3.0 demostration. Don't forget one of the things doctors want most is better communication with their patients apps that their patients can easily understand and use is a big step in that direction and if apps on the doctors side could streamline that even better. So in the long run even if those companies already in these software fields don't get on board new ones will.
Why would someone coming up with a solution for taking orders opt for the iPad when they could build for an Android tablet and get a larger variation of devices that do more for less money?
Why would someone in an architectural practice choose this over something like the Lenovo X-Series Tablet which not only gives them a larger screen, allows them to design software using a whole load of pre-existing design software, but also allows them to use it as a full PC if they want to?
The simple fact is that none of this is going to happen with Apple's AppStore. Firstly, serious work is fundamentally Windows and not Mac. And secondly, no-one wants to spend millions designing a serious App only to have Apple reject it from the AppStore (which Apple can do without reason).
Your assuming that only apple will ever embrace this concept of intuitive simple interface that get the computer out of our way so we can just use it to do what we want to use it for. Android is just as much evidence that it's the future of computing they just have a slightly different model. The reason Apple is getting more credit is that they've done it first ( the iPhone after all was out before android) and now they are the first to expand it. As such it places them as the leaders of this field and as such you can't just ignore them. There are already millions of people using this platform with millions more to come. Apple has no reason to not allow these specialized field apps. They don't compete in that software field and they don't break their products design or functionallity. So long as they play by their standards of quality and functionality they will sail through the app stores approval process which will only continue to improve as this process becomes more and more apples primary focus.
if anyone's life revolves around games on FaceBook, they need therapy. Flash is obsolete tech. it was a breakthrough over a decade ago, but now it is a proprietary roadblock. Apple now has the market muscle to force all major web content sites to either switch to open web standards or offer custom apps for the iPhone/iPad. within a year, they all will. there will even be a FarmVille app via an expanded FaceBook iPad app. there will be a Hulu iPad app (probably part of its shift to "monetization"). in general, web designers will incorporate open web standards into all new sites as at least an alternative. Flash will disappear within 5 years. MS will of course keep pushing its cousin Silverlight forever, as a DRM wrapper mainly. but it will totally marginalized.
Flash whiners are stuck in the past.
The iPad could be the computer that is truly For the Rest of Us, but it isn't.
The problem is quite simple: Apple is assuming that the user of the iPad have a Windows or Mac PC in their home.
* You cannot print from an iPad. There's no real way to connect a printer, and there's no method to send something to a printer in the SDK. To print something, you need to send it to a regular Mac or Windows PC.
* You can buy software and media files right from the iPad, but to do that, you need an iTunes account. To get an iTunes account, you need to set one up on a regular Windows or Mac PC, then sync the iPad to that computer.
* You cannot backup the iPad. To back it up, you need to sync it to a regular Mac or Windows PC.
It is unfortunate that Apple hasn't seen that the iPad should be something independent of a Mac or Windows PC. That this could be the household PC for everyone who doesn't understand the difference between ROM and disk space. I can even see the iPad as a replacement for 90% of the desktop Windows PCs at work.
Unfortunately, it doesn't do any good to have a computer that's so simple that Grandma can install and use it when you also require her to also have that computer she find's so confusing.
So close, but not on target.