Interesting exercise done by wow Yesterday, just three years after the launch of the iPad, a Retrospective until the first days after the introduction of this new Apple device, where many industry analysts and technology experts did not hesitate prematurely qualify the iPad as a failure and a disappointment, something that three years away we can affirm has been the opposite.
It must be remembered that before the launch of the iPad there was a lot of speculation about the possibilities that Apple's entry into the electronic tablet market could offer, betting more on a possible adaptation of OS X and everything that this meant. In the end, as we all know, this was not the case and we saw the birth of yet another iOS device, which initially unleashed criticism and even teasing by specialized media, some daring to give little hope of success to the new creation of Steve Jobs.
These predictions can now make us smile and even be fun, since in the long run the iPad was a true evolution in mobile computing, to such a degree that it gave rise to what many describe as the "Post-PC" era.
Among the most curious quotes chosen by tuaw we can find some quite pessimistic like David Course from PC World, written on January 28, 2010.
What do Apple's new iPad and Google's Nexus One have in common? They are both DOA: Disappointing On Arrival. Nothing at the height of its previous publicity. They both turned out to be more of a fashion accessory than the revolutionary device they were portrayed to be.
Why is the iPad a disappointment? Because it does not allow us to do anything that could not be done before. Sure, it has a neat shape, but it comes with significant advantages and disadvantages, for example, it does not have a 16: 9 screen.
The iPad is more evolutionary than revolutionary. People have come to realize this, as even a quick scan of the iPad news will point it out. I wonder: Has the legendary Steve Jobs fallen into his own reality distortion field?
Many focused on everything the iPad was not able to do Back then and that although today many of those points are already in the past, they were really inconsequential things, just look at the summary made by ocwebdesignblog in January 2010.
Things the iPad can't do:
1. It does not have a camera, it is true, you cannot take photos and send them by mail.
2. It has no webcam, it is true, there is no iChat or Skype video chat.
3. It doesn't have Flash, it's true, you can't watch NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX or Hulu.
4. There are no external ports such as microphone input, DVI, USB, Firewire, SD card or HDMI
5. It does not have multitasking, which means that only one application can be run at a time.
6. You cannot install more than Apps from the App Store
7. It does not support SMS, MMS or Phone function.
8. It only supports iTunes movies, music and books, that is, money, money, money for Apple.
9. Very, very, very expensive.
10. The accessories will have a minimum cost of $ 29.99 for each one of them.
11. It does not have full GPS
12. It does not have a Native Widescreen format
13. Does not play at 1080P
14. Cannot manage files
Russ Wilcox, CEO of E Ink said:
E-Readers will outsell iPads for simple economic reasons from the consumer device market
Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt told The Guardian on January 29 of the same year:
Maybe you should tell me the difference between a big phone and a tablet
Tech Republic's Donovan Colbert said on February 23, 2010:
We've all heard countless opinions about whether Apple's new medium-format devices will be a success. There's no question that the iPad is a slick, sexy device, but I don't think it's going to be an overwhelming success.
...
In the end, I think the iPad will finally be considered just like Apple TV, a product that Jobs should have left on the drawing boards.
Don Resinger, eWeek, Jan 28, 2010:
The iPad is not the revolutionary product that many of us expected it to be. Instead, the device is nothing more than a Tablet PC with a single operating system and a very important element: the Apple name.
The fact that the iPad comes from Apple is the greatest virtue of the device. Without that Apple logo on the back, the iPad wouldn't have gotten the kind of attention it got on Wednesday. Thanks to Apple, a device that is by no means revolutionary has reached a level of hype that no other product on the market can muster.
Bill Gates, CBS News, February 20, 2010:
You know, I'm a big believer in touch and digital reading, but I still think that a mix of voice, stylus, and a real keyboard - in other words, a netbook - will be mainstream for this. So I don't feel the same as the iPhone where I said, "Oh my gosh, Microsoft didn't have a high enough target." It's a nice reader, but there's nothing on the iPad that makes me look and say, "Oh, I wish Microsoft had."
Satoru Iwata, President of Nintendo, New York Times, January 29, 2010:
It's a bigger iPod Touch. I wonder if those features will be enough to get people to buy new machines.
Charles Golvin, Forrester Research analyst, New York Times on January 28, 2010
I think this will appeal to Apple acolytes, but it is fundamentally a very large iPod Touch.
Otto Berkes, Xbox co-founder and current CTO of consumer HBO was not as pessimistic as others were about the iPad, but he disagreed with the name and size of the screen. Berkes's opinion is particularly interesting because he was working on the Microsoft Origami project.
Several people have asked me about my reaction to the iPad.
I will ignore the name that seems terrible to me. IPad? Seriously?
Apple scores points for the execution and good packaging of the available technology. That said, its slim tablet is an amazing product in the context of an evolutionary timescale that spans decades of innovation and effort pursuing the dream of the computer tablet.
...
As a device, the iPad seems a bit big and clunky to me. With a 7-inch screen a balance would have been struck between mobility and the benefits of viewing a larger screen.
Bruce Berls, Brucebnews, February 04, 2010
It will not revolutionize anything, it will not replace netbooks, but it will find a large and loyal audience, especially after the price drops and some features are added.
As you can read, there were different opinions about it and incredibly many were betting more on the netbooks, which finally ended up disappearing over time. Several of the shortcomings that the original iPad had were gradually solved thanks to the updates and the launch of subsequent generations, but it is clear that for several of the authorized voices on the subject they lacked a bit of vision to appreciate what was coming. , something that surely many of us are not exempt from.
More information - The iPad turns three years old
Source - wow
It is evident that many were right, especially the latter when saying: "You are going to find a large and faithful audience, especially after the price drops and some features are added"; You confirmed that yourself, José, in the last paragraph. Now, don't get me wrong, I like the iPad, and I think it was revolutionary, but it is true that the first one needed improvement. To Caesar what is Caesar's.
Today .. The first iPad .. works better than many current ones, Although it does not have as many functions .. It has most of the apps .. iOS and the iPad is number one! From the beginning .. It is clear .. That they did not know if it was going to succeed or disappoint.