Why, why, WHY?!

GOOD GOD, EWEEK. “10 Reasons an iPad Is Not for You”? Did the extra four characters required to say “May Not Be for You” really make it too long?

Don Reisinger’s leading paragraph isn’t so bad (the iPad really may not be for you!), but the list…

For instance, did you know the WiFi-only model is… WiFi-only?! It’s true! And WiFi-only is not as good as WiFi and 3G!

The problem with Apple’s WiFi model is that it doesn’t boast 3G connectivity…


…making it practically useless outside the home.

Just like a laptop is useless outside the home! The Macalope doesn’t even know why they make laptops! Unless they have 3G built-in, all devices might as well weigh 200 lbs and be connected to the foundation of your home by an adamantium tether.

WiFi is great, but WiFi and 3G are better.

You know what’s even better? WiFi and 3G and cake!

It’s hard to believe, but Reisinger unironically moves onto his next topic.

It’s Relatively Expensive

Don, you know what’s even more expensive? THE 3G MODEL.

Users can pick up a netbook for substantially less than the cost of an iPad.

Yes, but Don, they blow. They blow really hard. And, more importantly, they rely on an infrastructure suited to more powerful devices. The iPad has a rich infrastructure ideally suited to the platform. It’s already a terrific reading device. iBooks, the Kindle app, the New York Times app and NetNewsWire all provide gorgeous reading experiences. And it’s all only going to get better.

Apple has promised iPad multitasking in the fall of 2010. But until then, not having multitasking is proving to be a major issue for the iPad.

To who? Certainly not a single, solitary iPad owner the Macalope knows.

Once again, the device isn’t an iPhone and it’s meant to offer entertainment and productivity value. That means it needs the ability to run two third-party applications at the same time.

Why? Reisinger doesn’t say! It’s just true, OK?!

In the coming weeks and months, several new tablet devices will be hitting store shelves to take on the iPad. Whether or not any of those products will be able to match the iPad remains to be seen. But wouldn’t it be worth it to wait and see if they do?

Oh, totally! Always put off buying something that provides value today for something that may or may not provide value at some undertermined point in the future! That’s the engine that keeps this economy moving!

HP’s Slate, for example, will run a full version of Microsoft’s Windows 7.


It will also have USB connectivity…

Stop! Stop! You had the Macalope at “full version of Microsoft’s Windows 7” on an underpowered device designed for the kind of input Windows 7 isn’t at all designed for!

…making it capable of printing (another iPad omission) and connecting the device to peripherals. It might be a good idea to wait and see what HP has planned before jumping on the iPad.

OR THE BEST IDEA EVER. And by the time the HP tablet comes out, something else might be around the corner. You might want to wait for that, too.

Is it possible that Reisinger has never considered this paradox? He’s been writing about technology for a while now, you’d think that it might have occured to him. But, apparently not!

Apple doesn’t have the best track record when it comes to launch-day products.

Actually, the Macalope would argue that Apple has a terrific record when it comes to launch-day products. Is it perfect? No! But show the horny one a company that does it better.

If any company can match Apple in the tablet market, it’s Google.

Why do people keep saying this? Google has exactly one consumer* hardware device under its belt and it’s not exactly a barn-burner. Stop making things up simply because you want them to be true.

The company has a history of bringing worthwhile products to the market. And now that Apple has shown its hand, the search giant can improve upon the iPad.

Right. Because, apparently, Google has a magical development cycle that’s exactly zero days. Or the improvements will be in the 2.0 version. You should wait for that. It’ll be out in early 2012. Oh, and in order to make this scenario logical, Apple will never release an iPad update ever.

If it’s touch-screen functionality and access to an App Store that users want, an iPhone is a better choice than the iPad. The iPhone has all the same functionality as the iPad, but adds phone capability and, unlike the WiFi-only iPad model, 3G connectivity. That said, the iPhone runs on AT&T’s network and users are locked into a contract. But that isn’t such a big deal, since any smartphone will have that.

Hey, Don. You know what doesn’t have a contract at all? AN IPAD.

Although iPhone apps work with the iPad, they’re not that convenient to use. Apps built specifically for the iPad work well, but there aren’t nearly enough of them.

As opposed to those tablets that don’t even exist yet that Reisinger thinks you should wait for. There are lots of apps for those.

Aside from the fact that the iPad is a relatively expensive device, it can get even more expensive after the purchase.

That may be true depending on your use. Don’s examples, however — adding 3G and buying apps — are true for any device, whether it’s a tablet or laptop or smart phone. The iPad’s 3G contract is actually cheaper than any other a la carte option and, unlike a lot of bundled deals, doesn’t saddle you with a contract.

What was the point of this exercise, Don? What was the point of this stupid and futile exercise? This is not rational advice. It’s a list of ridiculous excuses. The really, really stupid thing is there are some very good reasons why the iPad isn’t right for some people, but Reisinger doesn’t touch on any of them. If you need to do a lot of typing, you have to factor in the cost of a keyboard. If it’s 3G connectivity you really want, you can get it on your laptop from Virgin Mobile for a price just a bit more than AT&T’s iPad deal. If Google Voice and porn are your kind of thing, you’ll probably want something Android-based. And so on.

There are any number of other reasons (all, of course, need to be considered in the context of existing alternatives) but why the hell should the Macalope go to the work to come up with them? Reisinger and eWeek are the ones devoting space to the topic, and failing so dramatically to provide anything more than knee-jerk, dime-store analysis.

* Word “consumer” added after someone pointed out in comments that Google also has sold some server racks.