The comment about the wasted opportunity of the icon-grid home screen is right on, but this one:

"The iWork feature seems to fly in the face of Jobs’ message that the iPad is for people who want to browse the Web, share pictures, play games, and read ebooks."

This is so dumb I assume you're being intentionally disingenuous for some reason. Apple's program is to put "everyday" computing at the center of their product development--web, email, video, games, etc. That does not mean ignoring "business" applications. It means demonstrating that 'everyday' computing is the source for innovation in the business software space now. User experiences we get used to in software like iTunes--or more accurately, from great iPhone apps--is the basis for our expectations about software in general. We want our spreadsheets and presentation software to be as awesome as our iPhone apps.

By getting out in front of this with a demo of a iPad-native iWork suite, Apple's saying that the user experience of our so-called productivity apps should be derived from the 'everyday' computing we do when, say, sitting on the couch browsing the web. Not to mention they're setting the huge expectation to developers that the future for this kind of computing device is open to more than just browsing the web, reading email, etc.

Also: come on. iWork implemented not just as an app but as a really impressive and gorgeous app? That's insane. What kind of designer is disappointed by that?

BTW, the autonomy may be another problem. A Kindle, 3G turned off, allows you one or two weeks of reading even if you are a avid reader. 10 hours autonomy with the iPad is a joke.

Thanks everyone for the comments.

Thomas, I can assure you that nothing I wrote was disingenuous. In fact, I think if you took a more objective look at the iPad (talk about drinking the Kool-Aid), you will see that Jobs does not talk about "everyday" computing. He talked specifically about creating a device that falls between the iPhone and the Mac laptop, which, might I remind you, has always been marketed as a computer for people who want to use iLife to connect and manage their personal media (photos, music, and video). He listed a number of tasks at MacWorld, and last I checked, "creating spreadsheets" was not one of them.

I think iWork has lots of potential, and I think Jobs decided to include it for that very reason — to offer a promise. But clearly it was an after thought, and I'm not sure it was the right move by Apple to include it. As Jobs said, the iPad is not a laptop, and if people begin comparing its usability to a laptop, chances are it won't hold up. As Mark Rolston has said, "The keyboard and mouse are still very useful in the workstation context." iWork just seemed out of place. And just because it looks pretty doesn't mean it's good design. Isn't that the kind of shallow label designers have been trying to shake off for, oh, the last 20 years?

Nicolas — I agree that the iPad's LCD screen can't hold in terms of battery life to the Kindle, but this LCD IPS screen offers much better viewing angles than a typical LCD screen. Plus, Apple is using a new A4 processor from P.A. Semiconductor, the company they acquired in 2008, so it lowers battery consumption. But again, the promise is the selling point here. The fact is, the iPad makes the Kindle look and feel 30 years old. Most people will sacrifice battery life for a product they love.

" He listed a number of tasks at MacWorld, and last I checked, "creating spreadsheets" was not one of them.'

I wasn't able to make my point clearly. I think we're talking past each other on this. I'm saying that what Jobs specified as tasks for the "in between" device is not an exhaustive list of use cases for the device; it's a context for user experience expectations. Six bullet points on a slide a paradigm does not make.

Put it this way: what other spreadsheet program (and presentation program and page layout software) has ever been derived from a user experience once based on flipping through photos or writing emails? Until now, those have been distinct categories, with the "business users" always demanding their "power features" and bullshit like that. Apple is *showing*--not saying--that "what you have learned and grown to love about computing at home, on the couch, on the bus, should be a starting point for a different approach to computing in general."

Also: I bet that the designers and developers who built these new versions of iWork didn't consider them an "afterthought!" Yes, they're pretty. They also have a pretty insane level of interaction design nuance. I know you frog designers get all worked up when you think someone's accusing design of being "just about pretty." HEY MAN, DESIGNERS ARE MORE THAN PRETTY MAKERS WE GOT A SEAT AT THE TABLE NOW WE IS STRATEGISTS K?. Christ, we know, we know.

Hey! Thanks for the thoughtful commentary! A treat after slogging through the swamp of two line tweets from twits who are spewing the party-line from whoever butters their bread.

Agreed the iPad qualifies as something new. And while it may be just a shift in the paradigm for experienced Apple & iPhone users, it warrants less instant opinion. Like living with it a few days - if not more. At first look, it appears to be seriously USEFUL! (semi-casual?)

I may be in the line as well!

Kudos to Apple! Uniquely, they continue to evolve the state of the art. Over thirty years of real integration -and- real consideration of the experience. It shows.

> "Most people will sacrifice battery life for a product they love"

nice sound bite, like the rest of the article - let's see your data!

iPad success has two aspects, one is a complete failure among some individuals and the other is complete success. Many people haven`t tested it yet while those who have used the Apple iPad and Apple iPad accessories love it because of the amplification of the great touch technology offered in ipod touch and iphone.