∞ WSJ, NY Times post iPad reviews

Written by

Apple’s iPad won’t be released until Saturday, but some of the bigger news organizations have already posted their reviews. Two that I’ll focus on are the NY Times and the Wall Street Journal.

David Pogue’s review was kind of disappointing. He starts off the review with this line:

The Apple iPad is basically a gigantic iPod Touch.

That’s so far from the truth, it’s not funny. Granted, he’s used an iPad longer than me, but that’s not the impression I got from it, at all. Here’s another dandy:

The bottom line is that you can get a laptop for much less money — with a full keyboard, DVD drive, U.S.B. jacks, camera-card slot, camera, the works. Besides: If you’ve already got a laptop and a smartphone, who’s going to carry around a third machine?

Reviews: Love It or Not? Looking at iPad From 2 Angles [NY Times]

Walt Mossberg’s WSJ review gets to the point a lot quicker and is a much better review in my opinion.

For the past week or so, I have been testing a sleek, light, silver-and-black tablet computer called an iPad. After spending hours and hours with it, I believe this beautiful new touch-screen device from Apple has the potential to change portable computing profoundly, and to challenge the primacy of the laptop. It could even help, eventually, to propel the finger-driven, multitouch user interface ahead of the mouse-driven interface that has prevailed for decades.

Laptop Killer? Pretty Close [WSJ]


  • CWP

    tI am going to put on my Pogue-apologist hat. Mossberg and Pogue came to the same conclusions. They merely took different approaches. I found the Pogue approach to be more definitive as a purchasing guide, and so, a better review.

    First, the similarities in their conclusions:

    Mossberg: "My verdict is that, while it has compromises and drawbacks, the iPad can indeed replace a laptop for most data communication, content consumption and even limited content creation, a lot of the time. But it all depends on how you use your computer. If you're mainly a Web surfer, note-taker, social-networker and emailer, and a consumer of photos, videos, books, periodicals and music—this could be for you. If you need to create or edit giant spreadsheets or long documents, or you have elaborate systems for organizing email, or need to perform video chats, the iPad isn't going to cut it as your go-to device."

    Pogue: "The iPad is so fast and light, the multitouch screen so bright and responsive, the software so easy to navigate, that it really does qualify as a new category of gadget. Some have suggested that it might make a good goof-proof computer for technophobes, the aged and the young; they’re absolutely right. And the techies are right about another thing: the iPad is not a laptop. It’s not nearly as good for creating stuff. On the other hand, it’s infinitely more convenient for consuming it — books, music, video, photos, Web, e-mail and so on. For most people, manipulating these digital materials directly by touching them is a completely new experience — and a deeply satisfying one."

    I found Pogue's review very helpful for those who have not been following the months of discussion on tech sites and are trying to make a purchasing decision. He acknowledges what some reviews may be saying on tech sites in the next few days. Then he dispatches with those points by limiting them to concerns for a specific group of people.

    The best part of Pogue's article is that he breaks down the decision to purchase an iPad into a simple question: "The bottom line is that the iPad has been designed and built by a bunch of perfectionists. If you like the concept, you’ll love the machine. The only question is: Do you like the concept?"

    This is much more helpful consumer advice than Mossberg's summary statement: "All in all, however, the iPad is an advance in making more-sophisticated computing possible via a simple touch interface on a slender, light device. Only time will tell if it's a real challenger to the laptop and netbook."

    One may prefer Mossberg's dispassionate laundry list of features approach. I don't consider it "a much better review" though. If I'm trying to make a purchasing decision I am left with: "If you're mainly a Web surfer, note-taker, social-networker and emailer, and a consumer of photos, videos, books, periodicals and music [basically 90% of us when at home]—this could be for you [or it might not be]." Thanks, Walt.

  • http://www.theuniversalsteve.com SSteve

    Jim, your post suggests you missed the point of Pogue's "2 angle" review. The way I read the "Review for Techies" that you quoted from is as a brush-off to techies who only care about features and not about the experience. And, basically, that review is accurate. For people who just care about how many USB ports it has and how hackable it is (cough, Cory Doctorow, cough) the iPad isn't very interesting.

    But the second angle "for Everyone Else" is the real review. In the second paragraph, he qualifies the comment "The Apple iPad is basically a gigantic iPod Touch" by describing how the larger screen completely "changes the whole experience." You should re-read that part of the review (and make sure you go to page 2).

    There seems to be general agreement that the iPad is more for consuming media than producing media. Well, I think Apple's making the right bet in that horse race. There are tons more consumers than producers in this world.