by Ben French

This is not about the iPad's features, or a review of what the iPad will be like to use, or what's missing, or what next year's model might add, or anything. That's been covered/speculated many times over.

But what about the bigger picture with the iPad... or rather, behind the iPad?

What is it really meant to be, this new device? What is the over-arching vision behind it?

Apple says that it is meant to fill a gap between the "smartphone" and the "laptop". Ok. Sure, there is definitely a market there, but is it really a particularly big market? Many people think not. But if not, why is Apple going for it and making such a big deal about it? That doesn't sound like something Apple would do...

The vision and the concept.

Make no mistake; the iPad hasn't just been developed to counter or compete with the "netbook". It hasn't just been thrown together by Apple in 12 months or anything. It's been under constant development and refinement for many years, and the resulting iPad that has been released is a Really Big Thing as far as Apple is concerned - equally as big and significant as the iPhone.

So what is the vision behind it?

Well - and no doubt you've guessed from this article's title - the vision behind this thing is the same core vision that created Macintosh. The original, 1984 Macintosh. THE Macintosh.

That vision that Steve Jobs, Andy Hertzfeld, and other key people inside Apple had in the early '80s, which led to the creation of the original Macintosh -- that vision is what has caused the iPad to be created and released.

And I think we all know what a game-changer the original Macintosh was. So it really bears some thinking about.

The basic goal is exactly the same: this is a computing device "for the rest of us".

The iPad is, if you will, "Macintosh, Mark II". "Macintosh, rebooted".

The iPad is the Macintosh made as the original Mac would have been if it was made nearly 30 years later than it was, and with the hindsight of how the original Mac has fared since 1984, and the insight from nearly 30 years of the computing industry and market.

Think about some of the things that apply equally to Macintosh and iPad:

• they use a revolutionary new UI for their time
• their UI is massively simplified from the "standard" computer UI in widespread use at the time
• their UI is a huge shift of concept/metaphor from the "standard" computer UI at the time
• they are such a significant departure from a "normal" computer of the time that they spike an absolutely enormous amount of debate and commentary
• they are intended "for the rest of us" -- ie, people for whom the "standard" computer UI of the time is too complex to be ideal
• they trade off considerable flexibility and configurability in return for simplicity and ease of use and ease of learnability
• revolutionary/groundbreaking ease of use compared to the "standard" computer UI of their time
• revolutionary/groundbreaking ease of learnability compared to the "standard" computer UI of their time
• they are massively easier to manage/maintain than the "standard" computer UI in widespread use at the time

You might suggest that some of those points are duplicates - but they're not. For example, simplification does not automatically lead to increased ease of use. And, ease of use and ease of learnability are entirely different and unrelated things - and indeed are often opposing and competing goals.

Anyway, the last two - ease of learnability and maintainability - are probably the most key. One of the biggest problems with our current desktop UIs is how difficult they are to learn for new users - not just to learn to use, but also to learn to manage. Not everyone has access to an "IT guy" to manage their computer.

People who already know how to use mainstream desktop-metaphor UI computers - which include most people who read articles on the internet, and hence most likely includes you - tend to very easily forget just how bewildering first learning to use, and to manage, the "normal" desktop-metaphor computer UI is. Lots of "regular" people find computers quite difficult to learn to use, and also quite difficult to maintain. Sure, the "desktop" UI is massively easier to learn to use and manage than the command-line interface that it largely pushed aside, but it's still massively complicated itself, in its current modern incarnation.

The desktop-metaphor UI, and a turning point.

The other thing to realise (or remember) is that our modern desktop UIs - Mac OS X, Windows, and the GNU/*nix desktops (Gnome, KDE, and the many others) - are vastly more complicated than the original desktop-metaphor UI on the first Mac. Yes, they are vastly more capable and powerful and configurable... but vastly more complex as a side-effect.

The very original Macintosh didn't have multitasking, and didn't even have folders. It sounds unbelivable to us now (those of use who read tech blogs that is), but that's how simple it was. And it was absolutely groundbreaking. Not so much in its capabilities, but in its simplicity.

Now think for a minute if you took that original Macintosh UI, removed the "desktop" metaphor, removed the menubar, kept the lack of user-application multitasking, and actually extended the lack of folders to a complete lack of exposure to the filesystem entirely... why, you'd potentially end up with something very similar to the iPhone OS, or... the iPad.

Since its initial widespread adoption, the desktop UI has gone in the opposite direction to what one might have expected - it has become much, much more complex - not simpler at all. Doesn't that seem odd?

All the complexity that has been added since the original Macintosh of the mid 80's - user-application multitasking, hundreds of windows open and visible, folders nested to infinity, thousands of configuration options - that's wonderful for those of us who need the flexibility and features that these things provide, and can deal with the complexity that comes from the introduction of all these features.

But is it so great for those who don't need so much power, far less the complexity it brings? Is it really?

I know plenty of people who would be happy with a general purpose computing device that had no multitasking and no folders.

How many people do you know that struggle with current computer UIs? I know many people who have to struggle to a considerable degree to manage and maintain their computer and get it to do exactly what they want - or alternately they just give up, or get an "IT friend" to help out now and again.

If a general purpose computing device can be made which makes the considerable amount of time and effort taken to learn to use and maintain a computer unnecessary, and make that struggle vanish, and that device is priced reasonably, then it just might find itself a very considerable market.

So with the iPad, like it or not, it seems we are now at an approximate turning point. I say approximate, because almost nothing ever changes overnight. However the release of the iPhone, and now the iPad, is the approximate point in time where general purpose computing for "regular people" becomes drastically simpler and easier, at least for those who want the simplicity and don't mind the loss of flexibility and configurability.

The market for the iPad, and the direction of general/consumer computing.

In between "smartphone" and laptop, Apple says the target market is. Well, that's where it sits in terms of size and capabilities, for sure. Logical positioning, as well. But that's more a device category, not a market. A market is a group of people who will or might buy the thing.

Does it have a market?

Let's see... there's all the people who could really do with a simpler computer, and would be more than happy with the tradeoff of somewhat reduced capabilities. People who love the iPhone's UI but want a bigger screen. There's a huge number of those.

Then there's the people in various industries who could really use a tablet-style computer that doesn't need a stylus, and isn't running a desktop-metaphor UI (which REALLY doesn't translate well to a device without a precision pointing device). There's a lot of those too.

Then there's people who'd just like to have one around the house, almost partially replacing some of the funciton of the TV. They can take it on holidays etc as well, to update Facebook et al.

And those really are just the start. Wait until the ball starts rolling and see how many others become interested.

I'd say it has a very significant market.

And I'd say we're at a very significant turning point in the direction of general computing.

Welcome to (the idea behind) Macintosh. Again.