goyablog

Apple stock price, from it’s pinnacle during Stevie Boy’s iPad presentation to the market’s close today:

This represents about a 15% drop in two days. Wall Street seems a bit disappointed in the iPad.

A day later and dust settled, I can confidently say that I’ll pass on this iteration of the iPad. Bottom line is that for the price, it just doesn’t offer more functionality than the conglomeration of device I already have. Plus, I don’t like the proprietary nature of the thing (i.e., I want a more open OS and connectivity). Looking at the specs more closely today, it’s clear that Apple and third-party developers will create a raft of apps and peripherals (via Dock Connector and/or bluetooth and/or wifi), which in the case of the later means more stuff to buy and haul around.

The iPad is also a very passive device, it seems. It’s all about consumption — it’s a sexy slick content-delivery device that is short on productive capabilities. Do I really need to be lounging on the sofa reading/looking at digital content for as much as would make this device worth it? The inclusion of iWork for the iPad helps mitigate this passivity and is actually (along with a real keyboard) one of the selling points for me since I’ve been using Pages for my word processing for a few years now (dumped Microsoft products a loooooooooooooooong time ago).

The one potentially seriously cool use of the iPad would be as a platform for e-textbooks — if done right. With hyperlinks, colored illustrations and embedded video, and an ability to high and type marginal notes as you read, this could be any college students best friend. If prices for e-textbooks were half that of paper textbooks and if you could get a refund by “returning” them after a semester, it could be a win win win situation for publishers, students, and colleges. I see big potential there.

I’ve long been an advocate for the aesthetics and “feel” of using tech tools, which is why I’ve always been in the Apple camp, and the iPad epitomizes this sensorial aspect of well-designed tools. I’m sure I would feel good (as well as cool) using one, but this time function wins over form for me. I’m waiting for ver. 2.

“Holding the Internet in your hands; it’s an incredible experience.”

That was probably Steve’s best line during his iPad presentation. Talk about empowerment — we think of the Internet are being this vast limitless (virtual) space, but now we can (virtually) hold it in our hands.

But would I buy one? Not now. Here’s why:

I have a 27-inch iMac, a 15-inch MacBook Pro, a Mac mini, an Apple TV, an iPhone 3GS, and a Hackintosh Dell Mini 10v. Even if I could justify a “third category device” I literally would not have time to play with it without neglecting the older children. I’d hate to see my iMac sob (lots of big tears all over the desk). All of the functions I want from such devices are covered by these and the iPad does not cover enough functions in a single device, which is a shame. But let’s assume I just have the iMac and the iPhone. Would I buy one then? Tough call. I probably would IF the workability of iWork for the iPad worked. In other words, could an iPad wound if not kill the netbook? A provisional “yes.” Provisional because I would have  to find ways on an iPad to do all that I can on my crappy Hackintosh Dell Mini. There’s the rub. Without extra hardware and for about $300 I can, on my crappy netbook:

Email, web, word processing, blog & social media stuff, offload (via USB or the built-in SD slot) photos from camera, (lightly) edit photos, video chat, plug in a USB printer/hard drive or any other USB device, VOIP, connect to an external display (including projector for class use), and have a real keyboard. And multitask. And have 320GB internal storage. There’s probably more I can do.

For $500 minimum, I CANNOT on an iPad (without hacks or third-party solutions):

• plug into any USB device because THERE IS NO USB PLUG! No external drive expansion, no USB keyboard, no USB headset. But, one could use a bluetooth headset or keyboard.
• easily offload photos (no USB, no card slot). I could probably do it with an EyeFi (but not RAW files) or via the cloud (but that requires another device). No real ability to store/edit photos.
•  video chat (no camera — how lame is that!? I thought FOR SURE it would have a front-facing camera. Cripes, there are smartphones that do this!)
• VOIP (although I’m thinking there’s gotta be a way through an app or web, but I heard nothing about built-in voice input. It might require third-party device). UPDATE: There is a built-in microphone, so some kind of VOIP should be possible: SIP or maybe Vonage App.
• Multitasking (BIG disappointment)
• Other commentators have complained about the screen not being 16:9 aspect ratio and there not being support for Flash. The former bugs me more than the later (don’t really like bulky Flash content).

Now, what I do like about the iPad is the look and form factor for web browsing, e-reading, PDF reading, and maybe movie watching. I like the idea of 10 hours battery life. Steve boasted “I can fly from San Francisco to Tokyo and watch video the entire way.” Even if it were close to 10 hours, that would be great. Now, to get that battery life in “normal use” as defined by Apple, the iPad sacrifices multitasking, Flash player, and all of those battery-burning USB plugs and SD slots and GPS. The entry price of $500 is not bad, but still too much when I look at all I can do with my crappy netbook. Yes, the iPad would be “more intimate” and has a high cool factor, but frankly my Hackintosh turns heads and gets a fair share of “Whoa! That’s cool. Where did you get it?” (to which I reply: “Not from Apple.”)

So, while I like the concept (hate the name), the iPad doesn’t do all it could. I’d happily sacrifice some battery time for a camera, USB plug, GPS, and multitasking. If it had those (and maybe bigger internal storage), I’d buy one now. But it doesn’t so I won’t.

Apple could have — and still might in a future iteration — kill the Kindle AND netbooks in one fell swoop, but this iPad isn’t it.

Oh yeah, and that name; puhleez, iPad? Marketing sure screwed this one up, unless the tie-in with Stayfree was intended:

FYI all of you Chrome-less denizens of the deep: Feedly, as it turns out, has been around as an add-on for Firefox for a while and in is beta for Safari. Check it out here.

This is to respond to Alan and Notorious PhD about Zotero on Chrome. I should preface this by saying I have never used Zotero, so its lack in Chrome isn’t a problem for me. I have another system to accomplish much the same thing that Zotero does, using Sente and Evernote (although I admit that Zotero looks super slick and useful). That said, here’s the latest that I have gathered about Zotero on Chrome and my thoughts about what might happen. Looking over various Google Chrome and Zotero forums, it seems as if there has been many requests for a Zotero extension for Chrome ever since Chrome was announced for PCs, about 1-1/2 years ago. The response from the Zotero team was pretty much a unilateral “No can do,” citing (at that early time), that they did not have access to the extension frame for Chrome, mainly because it didn’t exist at the time. Now Chrome (for PC and Mac) is much more developed and is gaining a wider base (look at me!). Developers do have access to Chrome’s extension framework and have been making some pretty kickass extensions (as well as a lot of stupid useless ones). Technically speaking, Zotero could be ported to Chrome; there is nothing stopping that except the will to do so. It would require a lot of work on the part of the Zotero team and they may simply choose not to do it, even though they have indicated an openness to porting it, in theory. I, however, don’t think they can afford to ignore Chrome (they can go ahead and ignore IE because it sucks and Safari because it has a too-small user base). Take a look at these web browser stats over the past two years and what stands out is that Chrome debuted ahead of Safari, Firefox beats all versions of IE combined by about 10%, and that Firefox seems to have plateaued while Chrome is steadily (and relatively rapidly) increasing its market share:

So, I think that Zotero might put off developing for Chrome, but if these trends continue, they are going to miss the boat with what is shaping up to become the fastest AND most expandable cross-platform browser. There have been plenty head-to-head comparisons published and the basic line is: Chrome is MUCH faster than FF but FF has a rich community of add-on developers. Which brings us back to my friends’ dilemma: Chrome looks great, but Zotero is vital. If that is the case, then my advice would be:

1) Simply use FF just for when you’re being academic and gathering research materials and citations rather than when you are being a normal person blogging, tweeting, facebooking, flickring, and downloading porn (unless FF has an add-on for that).

2) Hang tight and wait until Zotero or someone else comes out with a Chrome extension that does what Zotero does on FF. It will happen, eventually.

3) Copy me and use the PDF/citation functions in the built-in browser in Sente and/or use Evernote (for which there is a Chrome extension). This system will not be the same as Zotero and will likely seem unnecessarily cumbersome by having to use something more than just one browser. On the other hand, Sente and Evernote do other things that Zotero doesn’t. I LOVE Evernote; I’m just starting to use Sente more regularly with the new project and can say that I like it a lot more than Endnote. And don’t forget Dropbox to store, backup, sync, share your files; it is simply magical.

Speaking of Dropbox and sharing, if you want to try the Chrome for Mac Developer Channel version, I can spare you a couple clicks by providing this direct download link from my Dropbox public folder. Install it and browse through the extensions available (not all are for Mac yet). In a later post I’ll recommend a few.

Oh yeah, and take a look at these funky, off-the-wall ads for Chrome. Smart and entertaining.

Oh yeah yeah, and take a look at the now-famous comic book that Scott McCloud did.

My raves about Chrome continue. I’m telling you, it’s the extensions plus a clean, minimalist interface that do it for me. I take Google’s concept — challenge, really — to be this: create a UI the inner functionality of which is in an inverse relation to its surface simplicity. Minimalism that masks maximalism. My favorite extension at the moment is Feedly, an RSS formatter. Sounds pretty dull and boring, right? Well, I’ve gone through dozens of attempts to use RSS readers and after a few days typically fall away and forget about them. The idea of scanning excerpts of bazillions of articles via RSS sounds appealing (if you’re an infohound), but I just never actually got into it in any sustained way. Others live on these feeds. Well, Feedly does it right. In essence, it takes your Google Reader feeds, selects from them, and formats them beautifully as a kind of digital magazine. There’s a quasi-random factor in what “magazine” you get, which is fun, although there are controls by which you may force feed it, so to speak. Feedly provides a “cover” and a “digest” and then sections according to user-defined categories. There is a also an “explore” section. Also, you can choose to include Twitter and Flickr sidebars that update regularly. What’s interesting about the Flickr sidebar(s) is that when you choose a section (like “technology” or “politics” or “Japan” or “Okinawa” in my case), Feedly seems to scan Flickr for photos to display that are somehow related to the contents of the section. Fun. But also dangerous — I’ve found myself reading and following links more than I normally would, but on the other hand I’ve come across some cool stuff, like the BookBook I’m getting Sara for V-Day.

I know that this is an effective product because I AM ACTUALLY READING MY RSS FEEDS ON A REGULAR BASIS! In fact, I’ve switched my home page from iGoogle (which I still think is pretty neat) to Feedly. It’s now my daily news journal. Here’s a recent screen shot of my “digest” page: