Now imagine...

Yesterday's post proposed that the controversy around the iPad suggests we're at a tipping point in consumer technology. 

We feel the winds of change. And with the world of computing transforming, but in ways yet unclear, the stakes are high. Apple enthusiasts want to see Jobs take over the world with his elegant and intuitive devices, while the anti-Apple cohort fears a world of Jobs-like autocracy.

But to think of the future of computing through the lens of elegant vs. clumsy or open vs. closed is to miss the point. 

The majors shifts in computing have revolved more around architectures than interfaces or software development philosophies. For example, it was the arrival of the PC operating system and subsequent shift from the mainframe to the client-server model that created the last revolution in computing. 

Now we're coming to a new age in which the internet, browser, and ubiquity of wireless, and the subsequent shift to a cloud/SaaS model, will become the drivers of major software and hardware innovations. These changes will enable the ultimate in mobility, portability, and performance. It's not just the keyboard and mouse that are coming to an end, but also, and more importantly, the days of loading apps onto an operating system on a laptop or desktop PC.

When you look at the iPad through this architectural lens, you quickly realize that the device ultimately represents no real change. The touchscreen, accelerometer, etc. are impressive and important, yes, but the architectural makeup of the iPad is very consistent with the client-server model that has been in place for decades. You load an app, which requires processing power and is usually worthless without a connection to a server accessed via the internet, onto a bloated operating system that also supports a boatload of device drivers. (No wonder the iPad doesn't support multi-tasking...) It works, but the model involves large numbers of interconnected and moving parts and is suboptimal in a world connected by high-speed wireless data networks.

The more likely future of computing, then, does not rest in Steve Jobs' elegant devices but rather in platforms like the Chrome OS that take the traditional operating system/PC model out of the picture entirely by relying on rich internet applications that can be accessed from any device. The future is in the scenarios outlined at the beginning of this post, which the iPad by itself does not come close to enabling.

If I were a developer, I would try for the next couple of years to make a nice profit off a sleek iPad app, and then put that money into development for the real future of computing. How about you?

So, the wait is over and the news is out. Apple sold "over 300,000" iPads in its first day out of the gate, according to an official press release. That's more than the iPhone sold in its first weekend but far fewer than the 500,000-700,000 units some analysts had projected. (See the WSJ article here.)

Does that make it a success or a failure?

Even though it is far too early to tell, chances are you have an opinion. The iPad has been one of the most hotly debated new technology products in memory. Blogs and online articles far and wide have attracted an obscene number of comments. Online discussions have become both heated and personal, with iPad enthusiasts being dubbed naive Steve Jobs sycophants and iPad critics being labeled naysaying luddites.

The controversy doesn't tell us much about the iPad or Apple itself, as most articles and their ensuing comments are 50% speculation, 40% name-calling, and 10% fact. 

What the controversy does suggest is that we have reached a tipping in consumer technology. The internet-as-a-platform and cloud computing paradigm is taking over, and a new class of devices, many yet to be dreamed up, is emerging to deliver users content and functionality anytime, anywhere. As our data networks continue to grow larger and faster, and as strategic partnerships between data providers and device manufacturers become more sophisticated, the way in which we interact with technology will drastically change.

What the iPad controversy represents, then, is the battle for mindshare regarding what that future will ultimately look like.

I have been incredibly critical of the iPad (or perhaps, more accurately, of the iPad junkies) and personally believe the design has some important flaws. Still, I have to offer kudos to apple for putting forward the most tangible, compelling vision yet of the future of computing.