Steve Jobs gave his famous keynote at Apple’s WWDC event today, officially unveiling the next iPhone which Apple is calling the iPhone 4. The device, which was leaked prior to the official announcement, is a departure in design from the 3G and 3GS that came before it, but will still be able to run existing applications from Apple’s popular App Store.

Pricing and Release Date

The iPhone 4 will be available on June 24th in the US, France, Germany, UK, and Japan. Pre-orders start on June 15th. Apple says that they’ll be shipping in 18 additional countries in July. In the US: those eligible for upgrades from AT&T will be able to get the iPhone 4 16GB for $199 or the 32GB version for $299 with their choice of black or white casing.

Design

The new iPhone is decidedly more square than the previous models. Gone is the rounded plastic back of the iPhone 3G and 3GS replaced by a piece of glass that is stronger and more scratch resistant than plastic (by 30x, according to Apple). The iPhone 4 is 25% thinner than the iPhone 3GS, and Apple claims that at 9.3mm thick, it is the thinnest smartphone on the market. The volume rocker on the side has been split into two individual volume up/down buttons, but their functions remain unchanged. Aside from this, there are no additional buttons or changes to existing buttons. You’ll still find the mute switch above the volume buttons, as well as the familiar hold button on the top of the device and the home bottom on the front. The stainless steel band around the device functions are the antenna.

Steve Jobs gave his famous keynote at Apple’s WWDC event today, officially unveiling the next iPhone which Apple is calling the iPhone 4. The device, which was leaked prior to the official announcement, is a departure in design from the 3G and 3GS that came before it, but will still be able to run existing applications from Apple’s popular App Store.

Pricing and Release Date

The iPhone 4 will be available on June 24th in the US, France, Germany, UK, and Japan. Pre-orders start on June 15th. Apple says that they’ll be shipping in 18 additional countries in July. In the US: those eligible for upgrades from AT&T will be able to get the iPhone 4 16GB for $199 or the 32GB version for $299 with their choice of black or white casing.

Design

The new iPhone is decidedly more square than the previous models. Gone is the rounded plastic back of the iPhone 3G and 3GS – replaced by a piece of glass that is stronger and more scratch resistant than plastic (by 30x, according to Apple). The iPhone 4 is 25% thinner than the iPhone 3GS, and Apple claims that at 9.3mm thick, it is the thinnest smartphone on the market. The volume rocker on the side has been split into two individual volume up/down buttons, but their functions remain unchanged. Aside from this, there are no additional buttons or changes to existing buttons. You’ll still find the mute switch above the volume buttons, as well as the familiar hold button on the top of the device and the home bottom on the front. The stainless steel band around the device functions are the antenna.

While demonstrating the iPad to a family member the other night, and explaining the advantages/disadvantages of it when compared to a regular computer, an interesting thought popped into my head, and I’d like to hear your opinion on it.

At $499 each, which would you rather buy, and why? Let us know in the comments section.

Apple iPad:

• Apple iPhone OS variant
• 9.7 inch screen @ 1024×768
• 16GB storage
• WiFi
• Touchscreen
• On screen keyboard
• 10 hour battery life

-or-

HP Mini 311:

• Windows 7
• 11 inch screen @ 1366×768
• 160GB Storage
• WiFi
• Full keyboard
• 5 and 1/2 hour battery life

I was really surprised that Apple didn’t do anything “magical inch or “revolutionary inch with the iPad’s [Portal page] on-screen-keyboard. The iPhone’s was definitely revolutionary because it was probably the first truly viable OSK thanks to some intelligent software design and a capacitive screen instead of a resistive one. The iPad’s keyboard has that same inteiilgent software design, and a nice big capacitive screen. The problem is the big part. The iPad’s keyboard works well, but it really only works well if you can set it down on a desk in front of you so that you can touch type on it. If you are walking around with it in your hands, it works quite poorly for thumb typing. This fact alone makes the iPad annoying to use for typing if you don’t have something to set it down on.

Even since I got the iPad in my hands, I’ve been wishing for a Dial Keys-style keyboard implementation. Dial Keys, if you’ll recall, is a piece of Windows based software that was designed for touchscreen UMPCs. Dial Keys places a split radial keyboard at the corners of the device, which puts keys right in the range of one’s thumbs. If Apple allowed developers to modify the keyboard on the device, I’m sure we would have already seen something similar.

I made some mockup graphics to put on the iPad just to see what Dial Keys on the iPad would look like:

I was really surprised that Apple didn’t do anything “magical” or “revolutionary” with the iPad’s [Portal page] on-screen-keyboard. The iPhone’s was definitely revolutionary because it was probably the first truly viable OSK – thanks to some intelligent software design and a capacitive screen instead of a resistive one. The iPad’s keyboard has that same inteiilgent software design, and a nice big capacitive screen. The problem is the big part. The iPad’s keyboard works well, but it really only works well if you can set it down on a desk in front of you so that you can touch type on it. If you are walking around with it in your hands, it works quite poorly for thumb typing. This fact alone makes the iPad annoying to use for typing if you don’t have something to set it down on.

Even since I got the iPad in my hands, I’ve been wishing for a Dial Keys-style keyboard implementation. Dial Keys, if you’ll recall, is a piece of Windows based software that was designed for touchscreen UMPCs. Dial Keys places a split radial keyboard at the corners of the device, which puts keys right in the range of one’s thumbs. If Apple allowed developers to modify the keyboard on the device, I’m sure we would have already seen something similar.

I made some mockup graphics to put on the iPad just to see what Dial Keys on the iPad would look like:

There’s been quite a bit of debate, since the release of the iPad [Product page][review], over whether or not it can function as a full computer replacement. I don’t believe that anyone can seriously say that the iPad could work as a full computer replacement for someone who would consider themselves a mobile professional — there are simply too many things that the iPad either doesn’t do, or doesn’t do well enough, for that. There has been, however, some reasonably logical arguments asserting that the iPad could replace a computer for those who don’t need more functionality than that provided by a netbook. Despite the number of ways that this point could be argued — varying usage scenarios, external media support (or lack there of), apps filling/not filling needs, etc. — there is one explicit fact that can’t be argued around: An x86 computer (be it OSX or Windows based) is required to set up, update, and otherwise support the iPad.

As simple as the iPad may be to use, someone can’t walk into an Apple store, walk out with an iPad, power it on, and just go. The iPad has to be plugged into a computer with an appropriate version of iTunes installed and synced first in order to function. I wonder if any adventurous non-computer owners have gone into an Apple store to purchase an iPad only to find out at home that they can’t actually use the device unless they own computer. It’s sort of weird to think that owning a Mac or PC is actually one of the minimum requirements for using an iPad.

It might sound far fetched to think that someone who doesn’t own a computer would go out an buy an iPad. But is it really? I know several people who own cell phones and don’t own a computer. Is a 3G equipped iPad really that much different? I can tell you that not one of the people I know who own cell phones (without owning a computer) expected to have to own a computer in order to operate their phone. With the iPad, that assumption would lead to some issues.

Even though one can create an iTunes store account directly on the iPad — enabling one to download media and apps — the iPad will always have to fall back on a good old fashioned computer in the long hall. At this point, besides the ability to update apps in a standalone fashion, the iPad cannot update over the air; it has to be plugged into a computer in order to update, if and when Apple releases new firmware.

There is nothing about the iPad itself that makes it impossible to be free of the clutches of a good old fashioned computer; Apple simply hasn’t set things up in that manner. Apple could rectify this issue by offering to activate the iPad in the store before the customer leaves, but they’d also have to do in-store updates for computerless customers, which seems a bit far fetched. Apple could change their update schema to allow for self-updating of the iPad so that it could update itself without the aid of a computer. While they’re at it, they could remove “ownership of a PC or Mac” from the iPad’s minimum requirement list so that users can pull it out of the box and start iPadding without an initial computer sync. Once these technical requirements are out of the way, people can go back to arguing whether or not the iPad is a computer replacement based on needs rather than having the iPad indisputably stuck with the proverbial ball and chain, that some people will tell you, an old fashioned computer is.

Then again, Apple has never quite positioned the iPad as a standalone computer replacement to begin with, which is an important consideration to make. They’ve compared the device to netbooks — saying that the iPad can do things much better — which may have been the reason we’ve seen so many arguments for or against that particular point. In the end, the iPad’s reliance on a full fledged computer is likely by-design: Apple doesn’t want people to buy the iPad instead of a computer, they want people to buy it in addition to a computer. They simply try to position the iPad as a better secondary computing device than a netbook, while still requiring a full computer for setup and updates, despite the fact that they could allow the iPad to function all by itself.

There’s been quite a bit of debate, since the release of the iPad, over whether or not the iPad can function as a full computer replacement. I don’t believe that anyone can seriously say that the iPad could work as a full computer replacement for anyone who would consider themselves a mobile professional — there are simply too many things that the iPad either doesn’t do, or doesn’t do well enough for that. There has been, however, some reasonably logical arguments asserting that the iPad could replace a computer for those who don’t need more functionality than that provided by a netbook.

Despite the number of ways that this point could be argued — varying usage scenarios, external media support (or lack there of), apps filling/not filling needs, etc. — there is one inexplicable fact that can’t be argued around: An x86 computer (be it OSX or Windows based) is required to set up the iPad.

As simple as the iPad may be to use, someone can’t walk into an Apple store, walk out with an iPad, power it on, and just “go”. The iPad has to be plugged into a computer with an appropriate version of iTunes installed and synced first in order to function.

I’ve always imagined the Apple iPad to be one of the easiest purchases a Dad could make. It looks good (no more ugly laptops on the coffee table,) it can be used for multi-player games (something to bring the family together) and it can be used around the house (no more being stuck in the broom-cupboard with the family desktop.) Naturally the price can also be justified (have you seen how expensive those new coffee machines are and a BluRay player, PS3 or Wii isn’t ‘that much’ cheaper. Even smartphones are more expensive over 2 years.) With its relatively large-format text and screen, simple user interface, loungey two-handed usage and access to music, books and films from the device itself,  it’s difficult to imagine the device selling to anywhere else other than the living room. Apart from the tech bloggers, apple fans, the rich, early adopters, journalists, developers,  and businesspeople who also had a reason to get in early of course.

Thanks to TouchMeMobile who kindly did a short-term swap on this iPad for a Viliv S10 we’ve been testing at UMPCPortal. You’ll find the Viliv S10 articles here. (German)

I’ve had the iPad for a little over a week and have been experimenting. I compared it with an Archos 5 to see where it overlaps and testing different usage scenarios. In between, the iPad has been where it is likely to live for most people, in the living space near the TV and remote controls and among what I regard to be an average European family.

Firstly, I should say that the iPad was exactly what I expected. It looks great but is relatively heavy (especially for a tablet that doesn’t have a stand.) It is built with stylish materials that aren’t ideal for hand-holding and it has a user interface that puts all others to shame. The app-store is exciting and the battery seems to last forever.  It’s clear that the touch user interface provides the main excitement though and this is where the ‘magic’ is. I liken the feeling to using an Air-Hockey game. Fluid, physical and somehow detached from the real world. It really connects the device to the user in a natural way.

The iPad was used around my home for about a week and initially, everyone was keen to use it. The game Godfinger featured heavily as did web browsing which was as fast as almost any 700gm device I’ve tested. It was used for a small amount of ‘twittering’ and email too but in the end, that usage model, and anything else that involved my private data and accounts didn’t work in the family scenario. It turns out that multiple users aren’t really well catered-for on the iPad which really goes against the grain of how I see the iPad being used.

After a few days, in a family that has a number of netbooks lying around, the iPad usage faded away. My daughter, 9, uses the netbook once or twice a week to collect and print images of her favorite Disney stars and to browse videos in Clipfish or catch up on ‘Popstars’ via the TV station’s website – all flash-driven videos.  Clearly, printing and flash websites don’t work on an iPad. We’re not big electronic gamers (the Xbox is only used as a media player and DVD player and we’ve never had to tell our daughter to ‘leave that damn Nintendo alone for a minute’ ) and we don’t read e-books for hours on end (magazines, TV and books still feature heavily in our living room.) Short messaging and emails are generally done on phones (SMS still rules in Europe and there’s that personalisation issue to think about again) so I’m left wondering what the iPad would be used for. After a game of Jenga yesterday (try simulating that on the iPad!) while digital radio played in the background via our basic cable subscription, I realised that this family, despite its tech-journalist father, is just not aligned the way Steve Jobs would like and I’m imagining that the same scenario will occur right across Europe when the iPad launches leaving just the aforementioned early adopters buying.

I see where the ‘magic’ is coming from and I see that the iPad is a beautiful purchase. It’s an exciting experimental platform and connected entertainment device; I’d love to have one lying on the sofa or coffee table. Many will accuse me of not seeing the bigger picture too but, as so many people have written before, the iPad doesn’t have a unique usage case TODAY that can be used to lever a purchase TODAY. I can’t justify it.

You might think that a web site called ‘Carrypad’ is heavily pro-tablet but although we love choice, lightweight computing and sofa-surfing, we’re acutely aware of the issues of size, weight and software keyboards. Many tablets overcome the issues by being flexible in terms of connectivity or by being extremely mobile but the iPad doesn’t even do that so at 700gm / 1.5lb, I have to say that this time, Mr Jobs, you went too far in your quest for form over function and missed the mark for a general use media, web and entertainment tablet. You might have created enough marketing magic for the U.S. market and a number of ‘advanced’ European markets (UK, NL, Italy perhaps) but in the very weak Euro/Pound zone right now, where value and privacy are often concerns and where prices are very high compared to netbooks and where marketing doesn’t work as it does in the U.S, penetration isn’t going to be high.

Drop the size to 7 inch and the weight to sub 400gm, open up the connectivity so that we don’t have to treat the iPad as a PC accessory and lower the price by 200 Euro, add a docking station and I think a lot more people would be able to justify it but as it is, my EU sales predictions stay as they are. Touching the iPad didn’t really change my mind.

Notes made in first 5 minutes:

• Beautiful
• Pre-set up not needed (as this is a loan device that has been pre-configured)
• Wife’s first comment ‘too big’ followed shortly after switch-on by ‘is that for us? I want one.’
• First touch reminds me of a pinball machine.
• Web, fast!
• Email is nice
• Weight too heavy
• Slippery when dry
• Initial pics taken on camera SD card placed in netbook

Other thoughts.

• Enjoyed browsing. At last sub 10-second browsing on an ARM-based device.
• User interface a joy.
• Materials high quality but not built for use.
• Notifications system Well implemented apps need to catch up
• Flexibility Poor. Transferring files. Connectivity. Productivity. Hardly the Swiss Army Knife of tablets
• Weight poor.
• Keyboard very good technically. Few usage scenarios due to weight, lack of stand.
• Price Acceptable for a web/gaming device
• Most interesting usage scenario highly interactive musical instruments and musical experimentation.
• Battery life good

Wife’s final comment: Good for eyes, not for the back. (Followed by joke about ‘eye-pad’)