The iPad’s Stealth Demographic

Posted on 29 January 2010 by


The iPad has generated a great deal of discussion throughout the last few days, with people being heavily divided between “It’s exactly what I hoped for!” and “Oh no…it doesn’t multitask or have a camera or walk my dog, it’s ALL WRONG!” Dave Pogue tweeted out a great article that casts the iPad in a whole new light; that it’s the perfect computer for the baby boomer generation.

Ultimi Barbarorum believes it is exactly what a generation that did not grow up computer savvy needs. He points out:

I know many baby boomers who are intimidated by computers. Plenty are not, but a great many spend far too much time wrestling with viruses and drivers, wondering what a DLL is, and generally not knowing the difference between their RAM and a hard disk — all just so they can read emails and check their bank account online. Some boomers have sired offspring who gladly help them with remote tech support sessions, but many others have not, and suffer for it. The reason for all this misery is simple: Computers are still too complex for those not prepared to give them their undivided attention. That’s even the case for Macs.

Not so with the iPhone. I’ve seen that thing understood within minutes by 2 year-olds and 84 year-olds. It does one thing at a time. Your finger is the cursor. There is no need to tap things twice before stuff happens. You are allowed to turn it off with the power button.

It sounds an awful lot like what I described when I reviewed the Dakim Brain Fitness System last summer. Computers are complicated stuff, and wrapping your head around a mouse, with left clicks and right clicks and drag and drops is tough. It’s one thing when you grow up with it, but if you never really get yourself comfortable around the motions it can be torture to use a computer. I’ve written before about this, but teaching my elderly grandmother to use a computer was not easy. She had stacks of step by step instructions on how to check her email, including explaining when to click once and when to click twice. Every single step had to be documented in plain language. “Click the icon” was too complicated, it had to say “click the picture that says AOL.” I also had to write in when she had to wait for splash screens and such, because otherwise she’d panic and start clicking randomly, thinking she missed a step.

If the iPad had existed 10 years ago, I would have had her take the $700 she spent on a Dell with Windows ME and set her up with an iPad. Think about it: You take an iPad with the keyboard dock, and set it up on a desk like a computer. If you’re dealing with someone who has no other internet service, it’s actually easier and more cost effective to set them up with the $30/month pre-pay internet. Now they can get what they want (emails from family, the weather, maybe some quick news) and it’s in the most non-intimidating package possible. If Grandma wants to send an email, she pokes the mail button. There’s very little more tactile and intuitive than “See it, touch it, use it.”

The next time someone asks me what to get an elderly relative if they want to check email, play a few games, and handle very basic computer needs, I’m going to tell them to seriously consider the iPad. The net cost ends up around the same as a computer, the internet plan isn’t onerous, there are a plethora of easy to use games, and the whole package has a far lower learning curve than a basic computer would (and the tech support headache is going to be far lower too!).

Via Ultimi Barbarorum via Dave Pogue on Twitter

This post was written by:

- who has written 924 posts on Gear Diary.

Carly has been a gadget fiend for a long time, going back to her first PDA (a Palm M100). She quickly went from researching what PDA to buy to following tech news closely and keeping up with the latest and greatest stuff. She loves writing about ebooks because they combine her two favorite activities; reading anything and everything, and talking about fun new tech toys. What could be better?

Contact the author


  • http://www.geardiary.com Douglas Moran

    That’s a brilliant observation, Carly. Truly.

    I also think that the–what do they call ‘em? Millenials?–would find this device ideal for college, if Apple follows through on getting textbooks on it. When I was in school, Macs simply cost too much for the average student. But $500-$800, plus getting the books at a discount? Huge market.

  • Haesslich

    Douglas: IF the iPad handles PDF’s well, then it might do well for textbooks… as long as the publishers play ball, which has been one BIG problem with e-textbooks. The best news about the iBook part is that they are supporting ePubs, which leaves us with Microsoft (at least in theory) going off on their own route when it comes to ebook formats. AGain.

    My main concern with the iPad is what it’s likely to get wrong for this generation (battery life, the storage capacity being half of a 32GB iPod despite the latter being $200 less, possible lockdown of software available on it a la the iPhone/iPod Touch difference with some programs which don’t require iPhone features like GPS or cellular service), which are good reasons to wait for a 2G iPad. I’m not sure I’d want to use this as my primary book reader, but it could sure take away users who are currently using their iPod Touch 2G’s and the like for web browsing away from the laptop. Oh, and the browser being the MobileSafari version (so no Flash support) versus a more full-featured Safari 4-style one.

    On the one hand, it wants to be a portable tablet computer, but on the other hand it limits the experience to a great degree by not allowing Flash or a more capable web browser, and the iPhone OS usage here limits what software it can run to just what Apple approves… which means we may not see a lot of more-capable programs for it to replace a presenter’s laptop when it comes to presentations.

  • http://www.geardiary.com Douglas Moran

    Haesslich: Well, the iPhone handles PDFs okay, given the limitations of its small screen. But we won’t know for sure until the durn iPad hits hands other than, say, Pee Wee Herman’s.

    With regard to the price, I just disagree. For one thing, the iPhone is contract-locked and subsidized, so that’s not an apples-apples kind of compare. Comparing it to he iPod Touch is more reasonable and yeah, it’s $300 more expensive. If you don’t think the bigger screen, faster speed, and increased functionality available thereby is worth it, hey, I have no argument for you. *I* think it’s worth it, but I’m a nerd.

    Finally, when it comes to software flaws, I tend to be more patient. They update these crazy things all the time, and every time the software becomes more fully-featured. So maybe it doesn’t support flash now; I bet it will in 6 months. Or whenever.

    So there ya have it.

  • http://www.geardiary.com Douglas Moran

    I guess the other thing about the price is this: anything that’s in the same general category that’s been out there has cost at least this much, and a lot of them cost more. What was Sony asking for the Vaio UX with SDD when *they* came out? $1500? $2000? Something like that. Frankly, given Apple’s history of, ahem, Cadillac pricing, I expected it to be ‘way more.

  • Haesslich

    Douglas: I thought the big thing about the iPhone when it first came out is that it wasn’t carrier-subsidized… which is why you paid $200 or more for it when it first showed up. Beyond that, the iPad 16GB is more like an oversized iPod Touch than an iPhone, due to the lack of 3G connectivity – and that’s where I got my price benchmarks, since Apple hasn’t been selling the Touch at a loss, unlike game console makers. So the comparision between a 32GB Late 2009 Touch 2G and a 16GB iPad 1G seems to be valid – same software, but how much better the hardware is is debatable at the moment, especially since the same OS and software means that they CAN’T optimize those programs too much for the iPad since they have to maintain compatibility hardware-wise with the smaller cousins.

    As I’ve said in another post, this tablet was priced far lower than the $1000 I’d feared they’d go… but for the price, would another 16GB have been a huge deal breaker? If they can afford to put that in the regular 32GB 3G Touch, then why go low-ball for the iPad? It’s not like they don’t have the room to put in the extra 16GB flash memory in that case, or at least it doesn’t look like they’ve got that particular issue.

    Unless, of course, they’re afraid of cannibalizing their iPod Touch sales – which seems unlikely, due to the physical size of the unit and the price involved. It’s closer to the Archos 5 Internet Tablet or maybe the Nokia Internet tablets in functionality as well as cost – the Vaio UX and similar ‘tablet’ computers ran full versions of a desktop/laptop OS after all, which meant they could run the software of their desktop equivalents.

    And with that in mind, its price is comparable to most of those, or even that Camangi Webstation. Its closest competition at the moment seems to be less the ebook readers, and more the MID devices that Intel has failed to really popularize the past few years; it’s not a netbook, much less a notebook, but is likely to be a more popular alternative for couch-based web browsing and light reading, especially with Apple’s marketing department behind it.

  • Pingback: Allistair Lee

  • Pingback: clipotech gadgets

  • Pingback: Daryl Morales

  • Pingback: Gadget Freaks

  • Pingback: Breaking Gadget News

  • Pingback: robcollingridge

  • Jason Johnson

    Sure it is more than a touch but the processor alone makes up a good bit of that. Add in the screen and the price difference is negligible. I also think they nailed the pricing structure. 16 GB is perfect for average users such as my wife while the $100 bump for 32 is the one I will be going for. The only disappointment I had was with the $130 for 3G. I really like the fact that there is no contract but since I would only want the 3G maybe twice a year I cannot see paying the $130. Still, we will be ordering two.

  • Jason Johnson

    Oh and I totally agree with the demographic.

  • Pingback: JCHYBINSKI

  • Haesslich

    Jason: One reason I’d suggest more storage is because this thing has another use which Jobs is apparently thinking of with the scaling-up of the iPhone OS, but which seems to have mostly been ignored by everyone else – it’s not just a mobile media/web tablet, but it’s also probably going to be THE main product to kick portable video into the spotlight. The Archos units, among others, have been trying to push portable video for years… but this is the first unit I’ve seen Apple put out which has a big enough screen to watch videos from iTunes comfortably, without having the loud fan interfere with the experience (a la the first gen Macbook Air). It’s probably going to do more in terms of selling videos from the iTunes store than the AppleTV has for the past few years – it’s a good size to watch videos on, and is extremely portable with a decent battery life for such viewing at ten hours.

    So, if Apple is trying to use the iPad to appeal to THAT part of the market as well, I’d argue thatn 16GB on the base unit’s too small.

  • Pingback: TimeWave Media