Shawn Blanc, writing about the iPad as a “professional” device:

Even amongst the readers of this site — whom are decidedly, clever, nerdy, and prone to living on the bleeding edge — when I talk about using the iPad as my laptop, I get more than a few raised eyebrows and responses from people who still need or prefer to grab their MacBook when it’s time to work away from the office. Even my own wife would not be persuaded to get an iPad when she needed a new computer.

I think there are many facets to this discussion. I'll pick two.

More “advanced” users who are aware of the scripting and automation features of OS X miss those in the transition to the iPad; on the flip side, users who don't want to automate anything still need to get work done using suites like Office or Google Docs, but the iPad doesn't offer the same degree of functionality that a computer has in those areas. It's an important difference: “geeks” who want robust automation combined with flexibility (usually the same people who end up writing on the Internet, like me), and people who don't require anything fancy but just want to get things done at the office. Given the iPad strengths (portability, screen) and constraints (text selection and editing topping the list), I believe the first segment requires a deeper reworking of iOS, while the second is more related to simply finding the right third-party apps (if any).

Case in point: the aforementioned Office and Google Docs. Apple's iWork suite was stuck for almost two years with a ridiculous file sharing mechanism, then received iCloud support, which was better, but still far from bulletproof. Even more pragmatically speaking, the iWork apps for iPad were a major breakthrough in 2010, but in 2013 they still lack many of the features of the desktop versions: Pages' change tracking is an example, Numbers' limited chart creation is another. What about Office, which, speaking of spreadsheets, admittedly offers even more power with Excel? Microsoft still hasn't shown anything. Google Docs? Google insisted on giving users a web app for years, then switched to a native app, rebranded as Drive, that, however, is fairly behind when compared to the “regular” web app. This is just a possible scenario – Office-type apps – but you get my point. And yes, in spite of jokes aimed at Microsoft – people still do use Office (or, again, the free, Office-type Google Docs).

What about geeks? They usually are early adopters of features and products that go on to find success with “everyone”. I speak for experience when I say those users would like to see better inter-app communication and a way to automate tedious tasks. The funny thing is – while I purposefully took some concepts to the extreme – those aren't “nerd requests” at all: Services, for instance, have been one of the most visible, understandable examples of OS X apps communicating with each other through data and files. Automator has allowed the creation of workflows with a “visual approach” for over a decade now.

So while I'd say this is undoubtedly “geek” and beyond most people's needs, can we say something as simple as avoiding duplicates wouldn't be beneficial to all kinds of iOS users? Does the “average” iOS user need to jump between 7 apps to complete a single task? How can Apple improve that area while keeping iOS easy to use and secure? How do they balance “geeky” features with “everyone” features? Could Automator go mainstream with an iOS version?

Does iOS need to be “more advanced” to be taken seriously for work purposes?

There are many questions. In the two areas I mentioned, Apple will need time to rework some aspects of iOS; developers still need time to figure out how to let people work on iOS devices.

Ultimately, I agree with Shawn. iOS devices – and iPads in particular – are professional grade devices, but their full potential will be uncovered by further developments of Apple's software and third-party apps.

In the pre-PC era, we built dedicated tools to fit different purposes. In the PC era, we learnt how to shift some tasks over to a single, centralized tool called the “personal computer”; we started exploring the concept of “ecosystem” through “digital hubs”, although we didn’t see the PC – whether “desktop” or “portable” – as a meaningful replacement for objects we depended upon in our daily lives. With mobile devices from the Post-PC era, we’re seeing tremedous growth in one particular aspect: that software can do (almost) anything. We’re in the process of learning how to use a single tool to fit multiple purposes at once.

This is especially true with the iPad. Following yesterday’s news of Cargo-Bot, an iPad game made on the iPad using Codea, I had yet another example of how software is changing the way we think of the distinction between tools for “work” and “entertainment” – and how it’s blurring the difference between computers for “production” and devices for “consumption”. John Gruber calls it “a glimpse of the future”. He’s right: here we have a device that is now capable of programming a game for its own platform, and it seems totally obvious in retrospect.

I never quite got the argument that devices like the iPhone and iPad were made for “consumption”. In the past five years, we have seen people making music on tablets, writing novels on them, and film-makers using iPhones as solid alternatives to their mobile capturing needs. The portability of the camera reinvented citizen journalism and revolutionized mobile photo sharing. I have seen doctors pulling out iPhones to do quick calculations and compare MRI images. I have been increasingly using my iPad as an “anything device”; on the other hand, I may have played no more than 4 games on my iMac since 2008.

It’s not just about “niches” or “bloggers” who want to find a way to do more on tablets than “normal people” would think is feasible. While the App Store has certainly seen a surge in popularity of text editors, Twitter clients, note-taking apps, and other kinds of apps writers and bloggers use on a daily basis, we shouldn’t forget about Final Draft, Procreate, Paper, the Business category, Apple’s Cards app, travel guides, books…just to name a few.

Software can do anything, but sometimes it is the combination of hardware and software that yields new, unexpected results that take advantage of the interplay of bits and guts. Apple based its mobile business on this. And third-party developers, too, understand that, in some areas, Post-PC hardware needs to be “extended” to address more specific needs. The Jawbone JAMBOX is a fantastic portable speaker that can augment your music listening or gaming sessions. The Nest thermostat is proving to be a hit among early adopters. Ten One Design is working on a Bluetooth-enabled pressure-sensitive stylus with an SDK for developers. Note how, even when extra hardware is needed, Post-PC devices leverage one thing to make these additions more natural, powerful, and connected: software.

It’s not just Apple. Other companies are making smartphones and tablets (and glasses), and some of them also recognize the importance of an ecosystem that fosters innovation and a stable business model for all the parties involved. It appears to me – and the numbers speak clearly for themselves – that only Apple, though, has so far acknowledged that a third-party software ecosystem needs to be nurtured, carefully encouraged, and educated about the latest technologies available to consumers and developers. And then again, Apple can do better.

The Times They Are a-Changin’. The multi-purpose, constantly evolving nature of software has changed us: most people don’t want to upgrade their devices every six months anymore, but they are always looking for new ways to unify the “things they have to do or want to do” into a single, intuitive, affordable experience capable of changing context and functionality with just a few taps.

In the Post-PC era, we are promoting software.

There’s been a debate lately as to whether the iPad can fit into the so-called PC category. Following the release of several estimates and market research studies showing much different results when the iPad is included in the overall PC sales of the entire industry, a number of people have voiced once again their opinions on the matter, producing a variegate mix of diverging points. Our writer Graham Spencer chimed in as well, analyzing the reasons behind certain people’s assertion that the iPad can’t be a PC because it can’t fully replace a personal computer.

I, however, would like to take a different route and look at this issue from a broader perspective that includes data, Apple’s history, the current market’s situation, and the tech community’s change of direction on the “iPad as a PC” debate over the past two years.

The starting point, I believe, lies in the words Steve Jobs used to introduce the iPad back in 2010:

Everybody uses a laptop and a smartphone. And a question has arisen lately: is there room for a third category of device in the middle? Something that’s between a laptop and a smartphone. And of course we’ve pondered this question for years as well. The bar’s pretty high. In order to really create a new category of devices, those devices are going to have to be far better at doing some key tasks. Better than a laptop. Better than a smartphone. Now, some people have thought…that’s a netbook. The problem is, netbooks aren’t better at anything. They’re slow, they have low quality displays and they run clunky old PC software. So, they’re not better than a laptop at anything. They’re just cheaper. They’re just cheap laptops. We don’t think they’re a new category of device.

In the few minutes that led to the iPad’s introduction, Jobs carefully set the tone and Apple’s position for the upcoming discussions on the true nature of the device: the iPad is meant to be a “third category” that executes “key tasks” better than a laptop, and better than a smartphone. He didn’t compare the iPad to a PC, but he did mention that Apple wouldn’t follow the trend of releasing cheap “netbooks” that “aren’t better at anything”. Of course, Steve Jobs iterated on his statements regarding the nature of the iPad a few months later at D8 Conference. This is where Jobs famously compared PCs to trucks:

When we were an agrarian nation, all cars were trucks, because that’s what you needed on the farm,” Jobs said at D8 last month. “But as vehicles started to be used in the urban centers, cars got more popular. Innovations like automatic transmission and power steering and things that you didn’t care about in a truck as much started to become paramount in cars….PCs are going to be like trucks. They’re still going to be around, they’re still going to have a lot of value, but they’re going to be used by one out of x people.

As you can see, Jobs’ public definition and positioning of the iPad slightly changed in the months between January and June 2010. I believe the more intimate setting of D8 got Jobs into a talking mood which helped him express what he truly felt about the iPad and PCs; I also believe Apple itself was (is) still trying to understand what the iPad ultimately is, thus definitions and public statements might change and evolve over time. Tim Cook stated numerous times that, whilst excited about the opportunities opened by iPad, Apple still has to fully understand just how much market there is behind it. Furthermore, keep in mind how Apple initially touted the iPad as a productivity machine (2010 keynote), then an entertainment platform (iPad 2 keynote) and subsequently as an educational machine (January 2012). Apple still has to fully grasp the potential of the iPad, and is firing on all cylinders to gain as much share as possible before the market is too crowded. That’s not to say Apple doesn’t have a strategy; in fact, they have multiple ones and they are trying to optimize the proper sequence for the company to put them in place.

Strategies, typically, are based on patterns, and Apple wouldn’t have gotten to exceed $46 billion in revenue if these patterns hadn’t been associated with the numbers and data coming in after the launch of the original iPad. The numbers speak clearly for Apple: of all iOS devices, the iPad has the most rapid trajectory in every quarter since launch with an impressive growth from 3.27 million units (first quarter) to 15.43 million units sold (last quarter). Horace Dediu has put together a nice chart showing the penetration of the iPad in terms of shipments and growth.

Numbers help establishing patterns that define strategies and business models. Sure enough, the early success of the iPad has allowed Apple to turn a product that represents a good 20% of revenue into a category worth focusing on for the future. As I explained in this article, if the source is to be believed, Tim Cook hinting at the iPad being a better alternative than a possible ARM-based, iPad-like MacBook Air is interesting for a number of reasons. First off, it sort of implies that tasks that can be accomplished with an iPad-inspired MacBook Air (that is, regular PC tasks with instant-on and a slimmer form factor) could be easily, if not better executed by the iPad itself. Indeed, the same report goes on to note that Tim Cook believes the iPad ”satisfies—or will soon satisfy—the needs of those who might have been interested in such a product”. More importantly, assuming an ARM-based MacBook Air has ever been in testing within Apple and that such a machine would be positioned as an ultra-portable, fast and durable low-end Mac, it means Apple sees the iPad as the portable and lightweight personal computer for the masses seeking a high-quality product in the low end. (more…)