Certain Habits

Two days ago Steve Jobs announced the iPad. And predictably, after all the anticipation, the initial reaction of technology observers was tepid. Many were critical, and some even foolishly condemned the entire future of the device.

The critics do have a good point. Steve Jobs acknowledged during his presentation that the iPad needs to be better than a notebook or a smart phone for at least something to succeed. (The punch line? “And a netbook isn’t better at anything.”)

Is the iPad Better At Anything?

Scott Adams of Dilbert argues that the iPad is not, in fact, better than what customers will be comparing it to (laptops).

And he’s right. The iPad confronts the strategic challenge that all compromise devices confront. It’s bigger and clumsier that a phone that you can have with you at all times, and yet it doesn’t make calls or take pictures. Compared to a laptop, it’s not as capable and not much more mobile, despite being expensive.

And yet, if the videos I’ve seen are any indication, I believe the iPad is dramatically better at enough computing tasks that several years from now, it will be a “no-brainer” purchase that will make laptops and smart phones feel out of date and slow for a variety of activities. How is the iPad better?

You Can Now Touch the Internet

The real innovation of the iPad isn’t its gorgeous industrial design or its apparently brilliant screen. It’s the user interface.

Watching watching the iPad marketing video and skimming Steve Jobs’ presentation, I found myself wanting to reach into the screen of my notebook and not just touch the iPad, but to touch the content on the screen of the iPad.

When I got an iPhone last year, the thing that surprised me most was how addictive—and efficient—the touch interface is for navigating content. Flicking through photos in iPhoto, scrolling with a finger, pinch and pull to enlarge, tap to zoom or click—each of these interactions is natural and intuitive. A mouse and keyboard feels clunky by comparison. The gestures also create a different kind of experience. When you sit at a notebook, you’re hunched over. When you interact with an iPhone, you are often reclined, or at least have a more open posture. I find myself sorting and reading mail, using Google maps, or reading the Wall Street Journal on my iPhone sometimes when I have a computer in front of me because the experience is more pleasant and involving.

But with the small screen, slow internet, and an underpowered processor, the iPhone is ultimately a limited device. As a computer replacement, it’s frustrating.

The iPad is For Browsing

Where the iPhone sometimes triumps, and presumably where the iPad will triumph, is browsing. Do you really want a keyboard when you’re laying on a couch? Do you really want a notebook when you have two or three people gathered around the screen? Do you really want a mouse or trackpad when you could touch the content instead?

When you can touch the Internet, browsing content of all sorts—internet, video, photos, songs—can be faster, more intuitive, more fun. Blessed with a large, sharp and bright screen, it appears the iPad makes it easier to review and parse large amounts of content. The Calendar and Mail apps demonstrated on Wednesday look like a big step forward in how you interact with that kind of information. I don’t have any trouble believing it’s the best way to look at photos (despite the 4:3 aspect ratio). And does anyone really believe that a portable DVD player or iPod is better for mobile video?

Browsing Wins for (Some) Print Media Too

Print media is by its nature, linear. For books, this makes sense. You start at the beginning of a story, and then read to the end. You don’t start in the middle, skip around, and move on the way you do on the Internet. Books are about a carefully crafted reader experience; the Internet defies scripting. The iPad may be a great e-reader, and e-readers might excel at not requiring shelf space and at being searchable, but it’s not going to replace the book.

But what about other forms of print media. Is the linearity of paper advantageous for magazines and newspapers?

To ask the question is to answer it. Newspapers are browsing mediums. We skim, flip the page, explore, read a little, move on. That’s browsing, and tap to zoom, hyperlinks, search, and scrolling is a big win for that. Most magazines are browsing mediums too.

Browsing + Rich Media Is a Big Win for Textbooks

We’ve learned a lot about how people learn in the last fifty years. It turns out that the more different ways you can form connections between ideas, the better students will remember them.

The only reason textbooks are linear today is that they have to be printed on paper. They don’t lend themselves to building connections between different ideas.

And textbooks lend themselves to a rich media experience. Photos, narration, video, animation, interactive quizzes—each of these and more could create a stickier, more effective learning experience. Studying could actually be fun.

Apple’s Challenge

While touch-based browsing is superior for a lot of what we use computers for, and while Apple has created an impressive device, they’ve also accepted an enormous challenge.

You can answer the odd email and bang out a quick note using the iPad. And the iPhone proves you can use a mobile device to create impressive photos and drawings. The Nano proves a mobile device can also capture pretty decent video.

But the iPad will never excel as a long-form, full-time, content creation device. A full-featured, powerful computer with larger monitor, faster processor, more memory and elegant keyboard will almost always be superior for content creation.

For the iPad to succeed, Apple will have to convince people that browsing is a different kind of activity than content creation. And they have to convince people that browsing is different enough, and valuable enough, to deserve its own device.

It’s not easy to change people’s behavior. And it’s not easy to create new markets. (Witness Apple TV).

My bet that Apple will succeed depends on two broader trends. First, we already spend a lot of our time browsing. We spend a lot more of our entertainment time online than in the past. Social media, blogs, photos, Youtube, online news—I probably spend two or more hours in the average day browsing between work content and entertainment. Even when we’re watching TV, we often have a computer nearby. Apple isn’t trying to change how we behave online. They’re just trying to change the device we use.

Second, the iPad is cool. The industrial design is, as expected, top notch. You’ll see people out with the iPad and begin to envy them. You might be sitting at a coffee shop or waiting for a flight and wish you had an iPad with you too. Then a friend might get one, or you’ll stop in at an Apple store, and you’ll try it for yourself. And the gorgeous will win you over. Anyone who, like me, became instantly addicted to the iPhone understands how convincing a great user experience can be.

It might take a year or two. But eventually you will have thought of enough places and enough activities that an iPad would work for that you will be able to rationalize the experience.

Or it might not take that long to be convinced. Games, video, and mobile-specific applications may persuade you on their own.

Me? I’m not betting against Steve Jobs.