deanupton.com/blog

I’ve been trying to think why today’s announcement of the Apple iPad has left many (including myself) feeling slightly underwhelmed. After all, this is a radical new product from a company famed for innovation.

Apple iPad

Firstly, the device was the worst kept secret in Apple’s recent history. There has been so much speculation about the product that people were bored before it was even announced. Personally, I think Apple may have been better to pre-announce it back in September to benefit from the excitement and fervour that existed back then.

Secondly, as of right now, I realised – it’s just a big iPhone. There is very little it does that you couldn’t theoretically do on an iPhone. Sure there’s the iWork suite of Apps, but I can wait until I’m next in front of my full size computer to do those activities. Capitalising on the large number of iPhone Apps is a double-edged sword; it emphasises that there are lots of applications available for it at launch, but it also leaves the subconscious imprint that it’s just an iPhone – with a bigger screen. There’s little compulsion to splash out or lug around a non-pocket device.

However.

When the iPhone was launched, the App Store didn’t exist. The iPhone was just a phone with a funky interface and significantly less functionality than competitors. It evolved into a tremendous platform, in part because it had an outstanding design from scratch and a solid, long-term strategy behind it. What was built in from Day 1 was exquisite design and engineering that applications could build upon; a combination that results in an experience that’s much more than functionality – it’s, well, beautiful.

iPad games

This is where I think we are with iPad. It doesn’t do that much that is new, in fact it probably does less than an equivalent netbook. But this is just the beginning. What will follow, in my opinion, is the execution of a carefully crafted strategy resulting in new and innovative applications that are made possible – and beautiful – because of the deep and exquisite engineering that has gone into this first stage. Owners of iPhones love how they interact with it perhaps more than what they interact with it for, and that’s a difficult quality to convey without just playing with one. It’s only when you see a video of someone interacting with the iPad that you can begin to get a feel for why someone might desire to use one. Compare it to the experience of interacting with a netbook running Windows or Linux. The Apps that build upon this foundation will be new, innovative and beautiful.

What we saw with the iPad today was like the announcement of a new type of motorway in the sky. It has left many people asking “why” and “is that it?”, but just wait until you see the flying cars that will run on it in the future.

Four weeks ago, on the same day, the Nokia N97 and Apple iPhone 3GS were launched. I went out that day to buy one of them. In Part One I describe why I chose iPhone, and in Part Two what I think 4 weeks on.

Being a former Mac advocate, I knew that the iPhone would be exceptionally good when it was announced in 2007. However the fact the original was only 2G (GSM/GPRS) meant it was no-go for me; fine for the US market which tends to lag behind Europe in terms of cellphone progress, but not for a regular 3G user like me. Then the iPhone 3G was launched but still fell short missing 3 big features – 1) no MMS, 2) a terrible camera and 3) no video-calling. Last month the 3GS with iPhone OS 3.0 was announced, fixing 2 out of the 3 barriers. For me, it was now a competitor.

However, I’ve also been a staunch advocate of Nokia’s outstanding implementation of Symbian; an operating system built from the ground up for smartphones. The solid foundations of a power efficient, multi-tasking OS coupled with Nokia’s excellent user interface and hardware design made phones like the N95 a phenomenally flexible, powerful and successful handset.

Having waited 6 months for Nokia to release their replacement flagship, the N97, I was split 70%/30% between the N97 and iPhone. Functionally, the N97 is superior and would almost certainly win. On the day they were released, I went to the Nokia and O2 shops to try them out. First, I used the N97 for about an hour. My observations in that time:

• 

  Nokia N97

  Beautiful design. The slide-out keyboard mechanism is perfection, although the angle of the screen can make it a little awkward to type.

• The screen is bright, sharp and clear. But the resistive touch-screen technology feels old-tech, requiring pressure for it to sense you. The stylus accessory they provide you with almost seems like an admission that the touch screen isn’t ideal.
• The User Intarface is a clear enhancement of the N95, and a natural evolution of Symbian S60. However it’s inconsistent, requiring single taps in some places and double taps elsewhere, some places have scroll bars others you just drag the content. Animations and transitions are nowhere near as smooth as the promotional videos – the CPU is clearly underpowered. These inconsistencies make me think they were retro-fitted to compete with iPhone’s interface, but it leaves it feeling unfinished.
• The camera, like the N95 is excellent. The lens cover is back, thankfully, after being removed in the N95-8GB and it benefits from an extra flash/video LED.

In summary, the N97 is extremely functional; it does everything under the sun. But – and here’s the catch – it doesn’t do it easily. I left feeling a little frustrated that Nokia had done a good enough job, but not the revolution the N97 needs to compete with iPhone.

Walking into O2, I didn’t want to like the iPhone 3GS. Firstly, the iPhone is a closely controlled platform; while there are many Apps available, all are vetted by Apple whereas anyone can write Apps for Symbian. For example, background Apps are not allowed by Apple which means it can’t upload my current position to friends. Secondly, the camera is important to me; the N95 has become my main camera because the quality was good enough, and the iPhone’s 3MP camera with no flash would be a downgrade. Finally, it would be the first time I had ever been on an 18 month contract rather than 9 or 12 – something I object to.

Then I played with it. I’ve used one many times before, so there were few surprises. However what was more apparent now was the striking difference in the experience between Nokia’s best and the iPhone. My observations in that time:

• 

  iPhone 3G-S

  It’s fast. Boy is it fast. Flicking between Apps pages, browsing the web, zooming – it feels as fast and smooth as my PC.

• The screen. The capacitive touch screen isn’t just easier to use, and more functional as it supports multi-touch, it’s more tactile. It feels like you’re touching glass – you want to touch it.
• The User Interface is polished, perfected, polished again and buffed. It is near perfection in its quality of design, thought, logic and implementation. The manual is just a couple of pages, and that’s because it needs little explanation.
• Stuff just works. I set up my email account in seconds – and it just worked. No faffing.
• App Store. While Nokia have had Apps for years and recently launched their answer to Apple’s App Store, Ovi, the iPhone takes choosing an App a pleasurable experience rather than a chore.
• Quality Apps. The majority of useful iPhone Apps cost (whereas the majority of Symbian Apps are free), but on the whole they exude quality.

After quite some thinking, I made my choice. The iPhone 3GS is more expensive, but in a different league to the N97. It’s almost unkind to compare them; like pitching a Ferrari against an Audi. I could list many things that the N97 can do that the iPhone can’t, but the iPhone does everything else better.

In Part Two – What I like and dislike about the iPhones 3GS 1 month on, what it’s like coming from a hardenned Nokia user, and whether I wish I had chosen the N97.