Is the iPad 2 Great?

I just finished reading a post over at ZDNet by David Morgenstern. The article started with the question, “Why can’t they just say it’s great?” The “it” in this particular case is the iPad 2.

Morgenstern quotes Edward Baig of USA Today:

As Apple unleashes the latest object of desire, a slimmed-down iPad 2, it makes what was already a splendid slab even better, even if the overall upgrade is relatively modest. Apple didn’t boost the screen resolution or bump up the storage. There’s no iPad that can take advantage of nascent high-speed 4G cellular networks. The external speaker is mono. No SD card slot or USB, either.

He also notes that Joshua Topolsky of Engadget referred to the iPad 2 as “iterative”.

The problem that Mr. Morgenstern has with these two reviews is neither of them bow down and worship at the altar of Apple. What he wants is for everybody to “just start out with the fact that the iPad 2 rocks and go from there.”

The problem with that is, the iPad 2 does not rock. Mr. Topolsky was right in his statement that the iPad 2 is an iterative release. There were hardly any changes from the original model other than a speed bump and the addition of a couple cameras. For this thing to “rock”, the original iPad would have had to “rock” first, which it didn’t. The original iPad was a cop out. A hack. A glorified iPod.

Don’t get me wrong, it sells really well. Apple’s best product has always been their marketing. They always manage to fluff up their products to the point where it’s just assumed that they’re going to be the best thing on the market, and so it doesn’t really matter if they are or not.

So, I guess in answer to Mr. Morgenstern’s question, why can’t they just say it’s great?

Because it’s not.

Loading Facebook Comments ...
Loading Disqus Comments ...