@dougogd@... Err, what? The iPad isn't what you think at all. It is quite powerful, it's fast and the OS is a *nix type. This isn't a question of "power"... (at least not for most users)
The "problem" is that there are plenty of interactions that don't lend themselves to "one or more blunt fingers on a screen". Why then (you might ask) is the iPad so popular? Well the answer is there are probably an equal number (if not more) of interactions where "multitouch" is at least as good or FAR better. An small example is moving rapidly though a large amount of text, with a "PC" you must either use the "scroll wheel" or "scrollbar" neither is as fast of intuitive as the iPad's "flick" gesture (they are many orders of magnitude worse). Some of these iPad gestures can be grafted onto the "PC" (probably no coincidence that Apple's own "magic mouse" has the same "flick" gesture as the iPad, and Mac OS X's scrolling system has had the "inertia" of the iPad added when using that mouse). At present the iPad is complementary to the "PC", and (deliberately) lacks many "PC" idioms (in particular the file-system). Many of these omissions are only sustainable by the iPad's status as "PC" companion, and would need reworking before it could subsume the "PC".
But don't fall into the trap of assuming the iPad is a mere toy. If the iPad is a model for the future of computing (personally I don't see it is - in fact I don't accept the premise that computing has a "single future"; I'm more convinced that we'll see a more fractured future where different form-factors will see different UIs more tailored to their unique attributes) then that vision is incomplete. My hunch is that the iPad will remain a companion device (after all, Apple will be more than happy to sell you a Mac AND an iPad - and probably an iPhone as well).
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox
