The recent Californian jury verdict brings to a head the ongoing battles between various mobile device makers regarding intellectual property and patents. To quote the New York Times "By one estimate, as many as 250,000 patents can be used to claim ownership of some technical or design element in a smartphone. Each patent is potentially a license to sue."

Much of the case by Apple seems to be over the copying of their user interface, the look and feel of the devices and the user experience. While they may have a fair point it seems to me this is more akin to copyright violation than a question of any real innovative theft. For example, on a PC you open an application by clicking an icon, or a rectangle of pixels, which is exactly what a rectangular button is on a iPhone. A button is an icon with defined edges, perhaps required because the input device is a finger and not a mouse pointer. A page of buttons is akin to a page of icons on a PC. I am similarly unimpressed with pinch and tap to zoom or bouncy pages.

Smart phones and tablets are made possible by a plethora of wonderful human achievements in technology brought about by concerted scientific effort often costing enormous amounts of money that deserve patent protection. Conversely, many software patents seem to be a case of a company being the first to assemble the relevant hardware and then applying obvious interfaces and applications to it, usually with prior human art from other fields. This seems more like a territorial dispute, you patent every miniscule detail, plant your flag and use all legal means to defend your market share against invaders. How they can keep a straight face and say that it is innovative is beyond me. Perhaps Samsung is really just quilty of stupidity for making their devices look so similar to Apples.

With the release of the iPad in New Zealand I was keen to see if it measured up to the promise  envisioned. Apple, however, in it's endearing way, had excluded many of the Provinces from the launch without actually bothering to say in advance (It then trumped that for the iPhone 4 by excluding the whole of New Zealand from the launch). A trip to Hamilton found only 32 GB models available which I was set to decline as storage capacity is not a priority for me. A friend's wife though, helping me to navigate the city, became enamored with the device in it's demonstration by the Dick Smith's man, "You should get this", I did as it seemed the only way to get out of the store and added the keyboard attachment to boot.

First impressions.... it's fast...fast at loading web pages, fast at changing between apps. The inability to run multiple apps concurrently, at least in this sense, seems irrelevant. The lack of Flash support doesn't draw a lot of attention, some who use specific flash services may be more affected.

Initial fears that a 9.7 inch screen would be too small are not born out, in fact, I doubt it could  be much larger and not feel cumbersome though there is room for experimentation with the size of the bezel. The iPad is quite heavy but that supports a stonking good battery life.

It's great to have the freedom of a mobile device but still see web pages naturally at ( the almost industry standard) 768 px width. On my iTouch I found I would often hit web links accidentally due to the density of links relative to finger size but with the iPad this is rare.

I was never a fan of the screen auto-rotate function of the iPhone/iTouch mainly due to it's unpredictability on the horizontal, so having a switch to lock this feature is appreciated and I mainly keep it on portrait though I've noticed some people have trouble resolving this mode visually.

The onscreen keyboard is a relief for my big fat fingers, fine for links, searches and the quick email. The keyboard attachment is compact (only a few cms longer than the device) and brings the usual Apple aesthetic appeal but is comfortable to use to type for longer periods.

I love this device, an instant-on joy, it has exceeded my expectations. Moving between apps, writing a note then checking an Internet reference, copying and pasting by touch, all seems incredibly fluid and natural. I'm sure it will become a staple for the novice and the professional, the casual and the heavy user alike. To the limit of the technology available it is virtually the best it could be and that's no small compliment.

Just as the Internet has revolutionized the availability of information the iPad, the Kindle and smart phones are revolutionizing the accessibility of information.      

For some years now I have been discussing with a friend the desire for a tablet like computer device which would allow simple armchair access to the internet, the reading of electronic books and access to newspapers. The logic is compelling that this would allow for the winding down of resource intensive manufacturing and distribution systems while providing the user with a great deal more choice, flexibility and value in accessing books and information.

 

Of course, what may seem logical does not always translate to consumer acceptance but, with a stable internet infrastructure in place and low power computing advances, the time almost seems right.

 

Why a tablet? It's a fair question, seemingly more often asked by power computer users than casuals, those that can't see themselves without a decent keyboard and the power and features that a laptop provides. To answer let me  recall a survey of TV viewers in the US a while ago that found a high percentage of viewers were watching TV programs and surfing the internet at the same time. I think it is understandable to have that desire for the relaxation and escapism of TV , in a comfy chair, but still be able to access the internet when you like. Sure, many internet features are coming to TVs but "text at a distance" is not entirely satisfactory in my view nor does it cater to individual use.

 

Why can't this function be left to the Smartphone size? Well I love these devices and the iTouch in particular. I am a minimalist at heart  and this was the first time I could do everything with one device: home control, email, internet, music. Ultimately, though, the screens are too small for a satisfactory reading or surfing experience. Not enough information is available to the eye at once. Mobile formatting helps but site adoption is patchy.

 

The launching of Amazon's Kindle has led to a major breakthrough in the acceptance of the reader class of device. It seems logical that multi-purpose internet devices must eventually dominate though, technology allowing. The anticipated Apple tablet has become probably the greatest rumour thread the company has yet seen. Every manufacturer (and his dog) are rushing to get their tablet version to market. It will be interesting to see how it all pans out and if this class of device captures the imagination of consumers.

 

Next: Some thoughts on an Apple Tablet.