Was Steve Jobs wrong about iPad?

[Rogifan]

Mark D Mill has an interesting blog post suggesting yes.

http://markdmill.com/2015/10/12/ipad-pro-and-the-toaster-fridge/

Consider Scott Forstall’s presentation (starting c. minute 29).4 The very first thing he talked about when he came on stage was the success of the App Store, with 140,000 apps and 3 billion downloads in just 18 months. Then he said,

“We built the iPad to run virtually every one of these apps, unmodified, right out of the box. Now, we can do that in two ways. We can run these apps with pixel-for-pixel accuracy, black-boxed in the center of the screen. We can also automatically pixel-double and run those apps full-screen.”

Think about that paragraph in light of what we’ve already considered: a new form requires a new OS which requires new apps. Imagine if Cook had shrunk iPhone apps to put on Apple Watch unmodified or if Jobs had shrunk OS X apps to put on iPhone unmodified. Yet not only did Apple put iPhone apps on iPad unmodified, they highlighted this as a feature of iPad! The result was anything but a good customer experience and, looking back, the images they put on the screen were downright comical:

It is funny now to see screen shots of tiny iPhone apps running on iPad.

Unmodified apps was not Apple’s goal,5 which is why they promised developers prime placement in the App Store if they submitted iPad apps. However, by making iPad run the same apps as iPhone, Apple made a toaster-fridge: a device that was a fridge but which had the operating system of a toaster. The form of an iPad can enable radically different functions than the form of an iPhone; by using the same OS (and largely the same hardware), Apple did not allow iPad to be true to its form. Instead, it really was just a big iPod Touch; nearly identical, just with a bigger screen.6

In fact, if you consider the use cases Jobs spelled out when he presented the raison d’être for the iPad (web, email, photos, videos, music, games, ebooks), they all are better than iPhone simply because the screen is larger. Or consider what Forstall pitched as the distinctive that developers can take advantage of if they modified the app for iPad: the large display. The size of the display was, and still is, virtually the only differentiating factor between iPhone and iPad.

I think he's spot on and I'm glad to see Apple is starting to address this issue. They still have a ways to go but at least they've acknowledged the problem and are starting to address it. For as much criticism as Tim Cook gets how much of that could be directed back to Steve Jobs? And now Tim Cook is having to fix what Steve left him.

 

[Shirtin]

Basically the iPad and other tablets are for people who don't like laptops because they are too heavy, thick, and take up too much space.

This is the main reason why tablet sales are slowing because most people don't mind having laptops as their computing/personal device. Also laptops are encroaching on tablets territory by being lighter, thinner, lower footprint, and being a complete computing device. Microsoft's Surface Book is even taking this concept further by having a laptop detach into a self containing tablet. With the Surface Book you can use it for work purpose and then detach when you want to watch movies in bed. It's a very compelling product for people who still need a laptop for work.

 

[bniu]

the iPhone apps running like that on an iPad is merely an accommodation so that you can have access to the apps you need on your iPad, even if the layout isn't optimal. It was expected that developers would eventually create universal apps that supported all devices. Now, I can't even think of any apps on my iPad that are not universal.

 

[Spink10]

the iPhone apps running like that on an iPad is merely an accommodation so that you can have access to the apps you need on your iPad, even if the layout isn't optimal. It was expected that developers would eventually create universal apps that supported all devices. Now, I can't even think of any apps on my iPad that are not universal.

PayPal for me.

 

[Nebrie]

Two big things wrong with this article.

1) The author clearly doesn't understand what Tim Cook meant by toaster-fridge. Increasing the size of a toaster does not give you a fridge, it gives you an oven. They have many distinct use cases but at the end of the day heat food. A fridge on the other hand has zero in common with a toaster. It's the exact same analogy as Steve's "trucks and cars" analogy. You buy the tool that is best able to fulfill the job you need to do. There's nothing stopping you from buying a dump truck to pick up your kids from school, but very few people would buy one because they don't need the extra capabilities nor the extra weight and fuel truck. Microsoft is designing the fanciest dump truck around - which is great for those who need them, but not great for 90% of the people out there who would prefer something simpler and less intrusive.

2) The author has no understanding of basic business principles employed by Apple such as MVP (minimum viable product). When designing a new product, you always start with the minimum amount of product and features necessary to realize the vision. You never start by trying to imagine all possible future use cases and trying to prepare for them ahead of time because it's a guarantee that most of the real-world future use cases will be ones that you did not think of. Look at the original iMac, iPod, iPhone, iPad. All of these products were most heavily criticized for their lack of features. They didn't gain most of their later features until Apple watched how users used the products and figured out how to address their pain points.

For the iPad, the safest way for Apple to proceed was to use the iPhone OS as a base and add a some unique UI/UX and let the developers run the experiments. Then, use what they've learned to shape future versions of the iPad OS. By pre-defining every aspect of how the OS should look and work from day 1, you run into the serious danger that if you're wrong, you lock yourself into a usage model that winds up being the one that no one wants and completely blow the market (see Windows Mobile, pre-iPhone).

People who say "well, Steve said this so he must hold on to this belief until the end of time" are the ones with zero business skills. Steve was never wrong about the iPad. People just don't have a clue about how Apple works.

 

[Rogifan]

For the iPad, the safest way for Apple to proceed was to use the iPhone OS as a base and add a some unique UI/UX and let the developers run the experiments. Then, use what they've learned to shape future versions of the iPad OS. By pre-defining every aspect of how the OS should look and work from day 1, you run into the serious danger that if you're wrong, you lock yourself into a usage model that winds up being the one that no one wants and completely blow the market (see Windows Mobile, pre-iPhone).

People who say "well, Steve said this so he must hold on to this belief until the end of time" are the ones with zero business skills. Steve was never wrong about the iPad. People just don't have a clue about how Apple works.

Why? Why leave everything to developers? Honestly I think Apple's been way to slow in modifying iOS for iPad to take advantage as Tim Cook calls it, iPad's big, beautiful canvas. That's one fear I have with iPad Pro, that Apple's just going to put it out there and hope developers make compelling apps for it. Notice at the event in September Apple didn't show off any first party apps re-worked for the device. No iWork or Photos. Instead we got Microsoft Office and Adobe. Tim Cook says he thinks iPad Pro is the future of computing. OK well if he believes that then I think Apple needs to show the way. Show us why you believe that and do it in a way that makes us all believe it too.

Also, why do TV and Watch have their own OS (even if it's a variant of iOS) but iPad doesn't? Prior to iOS 9 where was the innovation and progression in iPad software? It started out as just a bigger iPod touch and for 4 years it's kind of remained that way. There's a reason iPad sales have stalled. If people are using the device just for email/web/Facebook/video well they can still do that with an iPad 2 or they're doing it on their larger screen phone and the iPad is sitting in a drawer somewhere. If iPad Pro is just a bigger iPad mini/Air software wise will it really take off? Is the pencil enough to do it?

Basically the iPad and other tablets are for people who don't like laptops because they are too heavy, thick, and take up too much space.

This is the main reason why tablet sales are slowing because most people don't mind having laptops as their computing/personal device. Also laptops are encroaching on tablets territory by being lighter, thinner, lower footprint, and being a complete computing device. Microsoft's Surface Book is even taking this concept further by having a laptop detach into a self containing tablet. With the Surface Book you can use it for work purpose and then detach when you want to watch movies in bed. It's a very compelling product for people who still need a laptop for work.

Except the detached 'tablet' has about 3 hours of battery life. OEMs have been selling convertibles for several years now but there doesn't seem to be much evidence that they're taking off. Not sure how the Surface Book will change that. Is it really that different than what OEMs like Lenovo have been doing?

 

[sjleworthy]

apps are what makes the ipad exciting. Apple cant obviously develop all the apps. they have created a beautiful canvas. now the devs will take it from here. they always have. and i think they will, with bells on

i like ios. ipad (and 'pro') is many different things to many different people. there isnt a certain set route it must follow. to me as a 'pro' myself its a fantastic device that will fee earn for my work. i have no issue with it. yes, i have certain personal things i'd like to see implemented, but i can certainly work and live around them.

i cant wait for new and exciting apps to shape my work and help pay my way. ipad works for me. not everyone, but as i say, it is a different beast to different people. make of it what you will.

it will certainly sell bucket loads and be a great success for Apple i think. obviously, they'll never please all of the people all of the time. they'll never create that 'perfect device' in everyone's mind. its an ipad. treat it as such

 

[fitshaced]

Why? Why leave everything to developers? Honestly I think Apple's been way to slow in modifying iOS for iPad to take advantage as Tim Cook calls it, iPad's big, beautiful canvas. That's one fear I have with iPad Pro, that Apple's just going to put it out there and hope developers make compelling apps for it. Notice at the event in September Apple didn't show off any first party apps re-worked for the device. No iWork or Photos. Instead we got Microsoft Office and Adobe. Tim Cook says he thinks iPad Pro is the future of computing. OK well if he believes that then I think Apple needs to show the way. Show us why you believe that and do it in a way that makes us all believe it too.

Also, why do TV and Watch have their own OS (even if it's a variant of iOS) but iPad doesn't? Prior to iOS 9 where was the innovation and progression in iPad software? It started out as just a bigger iPod touch and for 4 years it's kind of remained that way. There's a reason iPad sales have stalled. If people are using the device just for email/web/Facebook/video well they can still do that with an iPad 2 or they're doing it on their larger screen phone and the iPad is sitting in a drawer somewhere. If iPad Pro is just a bigger iPad mini/Air software wise will it really take off? Is the pencil enough to do it?

The biggest successes in apps for IOS have been from developers. Why try and beat Procreate for drawing when they not only deliver a fantastic app, they do it exclusively for IOS. Why try and have stock apps for every use case when there are millions of developers who can populate your store with millions of apps? The iPad Pro is more ready for IOS than the original iPad was as tablets are far more popular now and developers are invested in them.

I also don't see why IOS is not considered a proper tablet OS. What exactly is it lacking from a platform perspective?

 

[Simplicated]

The biggest successes in apps for IOS have been from developers. Why try and beat Procreate for drawing when they not only deliver a fantastic app, they do it exclusively for IOS. Why try and have stock apps for every use case when there are millions of developers who can populate your store with millions of apps? The iPad Pro is more ready for IOS than the original iPad was as tablets are far more popular now and developers are invested in them.

I also don't see why IOS is not considered a proper tablet OS. What exactly is it lacking from a platform perspective?

It seems that too many people are fixated on the idea that a desktop OS equals "pro."

 

[Rogifan]

The biggest successes in apps for IOS have been from developers. Why try and beat Procreate for drawing when they not only deliver a fantastic app, they do it exclusively for IOS. Why try and have stock apps for every use case when there are millions of developers who can populate your store with millions of apps? The iPad Pro is more ready for IOS than the original iPad was as tablets are far more popular now and developers are invested in them.

I also don't see why IOS is not considered a proper tablet OS. What exactly is it lacking from a platform perspective?

So do you think Apple should get out of the business of first party apps and leave it all to developers? I mean what's the point of iWork if Apple is showing off Office at product launches. Quite honestly I would much rather have seen Apple demo an update of iWork that took advantage of Apple Pencil than having Microsoft on stage. Sure Microsoft is developing great software for iOS but a month later they're on stage showing off their own first party hardware. Microsoft isn't some neutral developer. They now want to compete with Apple for hardware sales. So why is Apple bringing them on stage?

 

[Skika]

A pool is just a big bathtub.

 

[Piggie]

I just think it's sad and embarrassing that basically all Apple have done it taken the user interface from a 3.5" mobile phone, and magnified it up to fit on a 13" screen and that's it.
5+ years of tablet development and they have not moved on from this. A 3.5" mobile phone interface.
That's shocking

 

[Rogifan]

I just think it's sad and embarrassing that basically all Apple have done it taken the user interface from a 3.5" mobile phone, and magnified it up to fit on a 13" screen and that's it.
5+ years of tablet development and they have not moved on from this. A 3.5" mobile phone interface.
That's shocking

Um, so slide over, split view and PIP don't exist? Last time I checked I can't do any of those things on my iPhone. I do think there's more Apple needs to do but to say iPad with iOS 9 is just a 3.5" screen UI "blown up" is nonsense.

 

[Seventh]

Um, so slide over, split view and PIP don't exist? Last time I checked I can't do any of those things on my iPhone.

Tend to sympathise with the view that a more distinctive OS could have been brought to iPads earlier. What is now implemented as PIP has been available on jailbroken iPhones and iPads for quite some time. The iPhones are more than capable of handling it and the only real surprise, given the similarity of PIP to what was available on the phones, is that it hasn't been introduced across all devices.

 

[Nausicaa]

Kind of related, but I worry about the impact of multitasking on software UIs and interfaces for the iPad and iPad Pro. It's something I never really considered when I wanted "true" multitasking, but the way developers have to design their apps to function in so many different scale configurations has to have an impact on the overall UI design on their apps. It seems to me it's a lot more difficult now to design an app that truly takes advantage of the screen real estate available on iPad and iPad Pro, especially for universal apps. Now, everything that you might want spreadout all over the screen also needs to fit in a margin, or occupy only half of the screen.

 

[Michael Goff]

Tend to sympathise with the view that a more distinctive OS could have been brought to iPads earlier. What is now implemented as PIP has been available on jailbroken iPhones and iPads for quite some time. The iPhones are more than capable of handling it and the only real surprise, given the similarity of PIP to what was available on the phones, is that it hasn't been introduced across all devices.

Why would you want PiP on a small screen?

 

[mtneer]

Why would you want PiP on a small screen?

So you can keep the video rolling, while you attend to another task (text message/ email whatever) before resuming the show? Otherwise, you have to stop the video to do anything else. I don't think I would use PIP as a full time watching experience, on an iPad or even a large TV.

 

[Seventh]

Why would you want PiP on a small screen?

As with any other screen - to watch video whilst using another app. Regularly handy on a 6 Plus when watching a stream and [in most cases] using a Twitter client.

 

[sracer]

Why? Why leave everything to developers? Honestly I think Apple's been way to slow in modifying iOS for iPad to take advantage as Tim Cook calls it, iPad's big, beautiful canvas. That's one fear I have with iPad Pro, that Apple's just going to put it out there and hope developers make compelling apps for it. Notice at the event in September Apple didn't show off any first party apps re-worked for the device. No iWork or Photos. Instead we got Microsoft Office and Adobe. Tim Cook says he thinks iPad Pro is the future of computing. OK well if he believes that then I think Apple needs to show the way. Show us why you believe that and do it in a way that makes us all believe it too.

The days of Apple having to do the heavy lifting in hardware AND software are over. Apple products are no longer niche products. Apple HAD to develop rich applications and include them with their hardware in the early days because they understood that hardware alone doesn't cut it. It is the combination of hardware and software that provide a package for creativity, productivity, and entertainment.

Including iWork and iLife with hardware made a compelling out-of-the-box package. With the explosive growth and acceptance of the iPhone and iOS, Apple understood that it no longer needs to be out there actively leading the charge in software.

This is one of the reasons why iWork was dumbed down. It was no longer of paramount importance to provide a productivity suite capable of performing 80% (an arbitrarily high percentage that I just made up) of office productivity functions. It was more important to have consistency and cross-platform experiences between iOS and OSX. With MS Office being more actively supported and the maturing of open office suites like LibreOffice, office productivity was covered by others.

Also keep in mind that it is most likely that Apple did not operate in a vacuum in its decision to simplify iWork. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Apple and Microsoft have had discussions about Office on OSX and iOS before the decision on the fate of iWork.

3rd party hardware and software vendors have been pushing the limits of what the iPad can do. In particular with active stylus options (that didn't require any underlying specific support from iOS). Pretty creative and innovative.

Apple sharing the stage with Microsoft and Adobe was their way of saying, "we're not the isolationists that we were in the past".

Given this, I don't think that Apple has to do anything beyond what they're doing to make people believe it too. Just look at the alternatives from their competition. What Apple is producing with the iPad Pro doesn't even play catch-up and yet people are already anxious to open their wallets.

The iPad Pro falls flat for me, but I am in the minority.

 

[Piggie]

Um, so slide over, split view and PIP don't exist? Last time I checked I can't do any of those things on my iPhone. I do think there's more Apple needs to do but to say iPad with iOS 9 is just a 3.5" screen UI "blown up" is nonsense.

Totally different indeed:

 

[Michael Goff]

So you can keep the video rolling, while you attend to another task (text message/ email whatever) before resuming the show? Otherwise, you have to stop the video to do anything else. I don't think I would use PIP as a full time watching experience, on an iPad or even a large TV.

And then you'd have to focus on one task or the other. How terrible would that be?

As with any other screen - to watch video whilst using another app. Regularly handy on a 6 Plus when watching a stream and [in most cases] using a Twitter client.

5.5" is barely big enough to enjoy the show by itself. Now you want to take away from that and split a person's already limited focus?

Totally different indeed:

How often are you on the home screen?

 

[mtneer]

And then you'd have to focus on one task or the other. How terrible would that be?

In an arguments of increments, it will not be hard at all to not have any device and just use a TV and a desktop to watch videos and check emails separately. But, in a modern world when people are watching TV shows and using a secondary device for checking twitter etc. - it is not far fetched to expect to draw away form the video for a short while (maybe while ads are running?) and quickly check something else and get back without stopping either activity completely.

 

[Seventh]

5.5" is barely big enough to enjoy the show by itself. Now you want to take away from that and split a person's already limited focus?

It's added functionality that I've used most days and couldn't say it's ever been any great struggle. When looking to follow video and use other apps at the same time it's been more than adequate.

 

[Rogifan]

Totally different indeed:

So in your mind the OS and UI is only defined by the "home" screen? I use my iPad every day, probably more than my iPhone and I spend next to no time on the home screen. I would imagine most people using a Windows 10 device don't spend much time looking at live tiles either.