I’ve had an iPad in my hands for about 11 hours now, and after most of a day spent using it, albeit sparingly, talking about it, and showing it off to colleagues who plowed me with endless questions, I’m ready to say that it’s a terrific device that’s going to leave an indelible mark on the personal computing landscape.

Yet the point I made in this column on Feb 5 still rings true. For every person who’s yearned to get their hands on it after seeing it in my hands, there has been another who can’t quite get their head around the notion of what an iPad is really for. Some get the iPad intuitively, others think it an unnecessary toy.

It’s certainly no toy to me, but I can see how someone would come to that conclusion. Since so many have asked, I’ll answer the two most common questions right off, and then elaborate on them at some length. First, I don’t think the iPad is a Kindle killer. It’s rather more of a netbook killer.

My colleague Rich Jaroslavsky took it for a spin on Bloomberg TV. Embedded below. His latest column on the iPad is here.

More on these and more of my own observations after the jump.

The iPad is on balance very much as Apple has advertised it. Like the iPhone before it, the question to ask is not what it does, but what it doesn’t do. I’ve been thinking of the iPad as a device aimed primarily at media consumption, and there’s no question that it does that in spades.

At one point this morning I left it propped up on my desk playing Led Zeppelin while I did other work. At various times I left it on my desk displaying a rolling slide show of photo albums, not unlike the digital photo frames that have been so popular for years. I’ve used it to watch scenes from the movie “Up” and from the recent “Star Trek” movie, and from an episode of the TV show “Glee.” I’ve browsed the Web, and watched some videos on YouTube, and read a few pages of the book “Winnie The Pooh,” and even used it read and send a few email messages. (In fact I used the email application to write this blog entry.)

If that were a more or less complete list of all the things the iPad could do, it would almost be enough. And yet the true possibilities seem more or less endless. The iPad that Apple provided me for testing purposes came loaded with numerous applications, and they show a great deal of potential, which leads me to believe that it won’t be long before those people who “don’t get the iPad” start figuring it out pretty quickly.

There’s not much to understand or figure out once you pick one up. If you can point, you can use it. This will make Apple’s task of educating those on the fence about it easier.

Like the iPhone before it, the iPad is extraordinary for its simplicity, versatility and aesthetics. The iPad will in time be seen for having popularized a new branch of the personal computing family tree, one that sits between notebooks and smart phones, a type of device for which there isn’t yet a proper name. Those companies, most of them other PC makers, who have staked their futures and fortunes on the stripped-down notebook computers known as netbooks have the most to worry about. I briefly had a netbook, and I found it all but useless, too small and underpowered to be useful and engaging for anymore beyond email. Others have said it, and it bears repeating: The iPad is a netbook killer.

And then there’s Amazon. Many of the people I’ve talked to have tried to compare it Amazon’s Kindle electronic book reader, which I’ve also tried. I don’t personally think the comparisons are entirely fair. Yes, its true, that the reading experience on the iPad is in many ways superior to the Kindle. But there are a few ways in which in a head-to-head comparison the Kindle wins.

The first thing I noticed was its weight. The iPad weighs 1.5 pounds versus 10.2 ounces or less than two-thirds of a pound for the Kindle. Having used a Kindle, the iPad feels a bit on the heavy side.

Second, the Kindle’s battery lasts about a week on a single charge, whereas the iPad’s lasts about 10 hours, depending how you use it. Most of this has to do with the fundamental differences in the display technology they use. The Kindle’s e-ink screen uses power only when the image change, such as when a page is turned. The iPad’s LED-backlit display requires power whenever it’s in use.

The Kindle is an excellent reader, but it’s a far less ambitious device. It doesn’t play movies or video games. It’s just for reading. The iPad is great for reading and so much more. While they overlap, they’re different. In the end, I believe they’ll co-exist, and some people might even go to the trouble and expense of owning both. While the iPad may cost Amazon some sales of the Kindle, it is by no means, in my mind a Kindle killer. In fact, I can’t wait to try Amazon’s Kindle application on the iPad, as I’ve turned out to like the same application on the iPhone very much.

Someone asked me today whether or not I would use the iPad every day. I might. I have kept an iPod touch on my bedside table now for about a year, for quick access to my email, quick and simple Google searches and for checking the weather, especially during some of the recent cold snaps in New York. While it’s a little big for my bedside table, I would use the iPad around my home often.

I can see myself on the couch using it for sending Twitter messages while watching television. In my meeting with Apple this morning I saw an excellent application created by the NBA that displays game statistics and information that are updated live while a game is in progress, that would be fun to have while watching a game. I don’t play many video games, but the ones I’ve tried on the iPad are certainly fun and engaging. The best I’ve tried yet is RealRacingHD, a race car game that uses the iPad’s accelerometer to turn the device into a steering wheel.

I was surprised by how much I loved the Marvel Comics application. A few weeks ago I had a miserable cold on the weekend and for some reason had a peculiar urge to read comic books. I found a digital comic book reader, BitCartel’s ComicBookLover and found a few files to download to it and read them on my Mac. It was okay. Today I tried Marvel’s iPad application, and I kinda wish I had a cold again so I had an excuse to crash on the couch and read Spider Man and drink tea. If you like comic books (and who doesn’t, at least once in awhile?) this is a lot of fun. It lets you see full pages or zoom in to individual panels, and you can download books — some are free and some cost $1.99 — from Marvel’s store.

There are a few things I would do to improve the iPad. As I said before, it could stand to lose a few ounces. It could use a camera for video chats via a future iChat application or Skype, though I’d be shocked if a third-party add-on camera didn’t appear on the market soon. And while watching video I found myself bothered by glare on the screen from the ambient light in the room, or a faint but distracting reflection of myself in the glass. And yes, I do miss the Flash video found so often on the Web. HTML 5 may indeed represent the future of Web video, as Apple CEO Steve Jobs has said, but that future isn’t here yet. I can see the iPad prodding things along, but when browsing the Web, those all-too-frequent empty boxes where the video would be sure make it seem like something’s missing. The included YouTube application is excellent, but doesn’t make up for it.

Criticisms aside, the iPad is on the whole excellent. It may not amount to an iPhone-like phenomenon, at least not at first. But it’s helpful to remember that the iPhone didn’t really become a phenomenon until it’s second iteration in 2008. I think the same thing will happen with the iPad, which means that only more excellence lies ahead.

Reader Commentstenand20 April 1, 2010 10:30 PM

Netbook killer? I don’t think so. It’s too expensive.

There have been two big revolutions in computing hardware (1) price (2) performance.

The iPad is a major step back on price and its stingy on resources.

In terms of resources: I mean 16GB?

I can’t justify spending close to $800 to get a decently configured system with the keyboard. I can buy two high-end netbooks for that amount.

At this point, other vendors will be releasing their own touchpads over the next year or so. I’ll wait and see.

In terms of performance, I haven’t tested it. I’ll assume it’s good. I’ve been a big fan of the iTouch because of it’s cost 32 GB less than $300; outstanding video and music playback, and a decent ereader if you don’t mind smaller screens, which I don’t.

For now, the iPad is a discretionary buy and everything I get has to have work application to it and this just doesn’t.

Jonathan April 1, 2010 11:50 PM

Good read. One thing all the iPad critics have in common: They haven’t used one.

When these things get out there, and your friend has one, and you’re flipping through their photo album… or playing some game… oh ya… you’ll want one. And ultimately, sales & success are driven by what we want, not what we “need”.

James Rainier April 2, 2010 12:00 AM

Well first, you should be comparing the iPad to the Kindle DX in which there is only a, what, 5 ounce difference. Most netbooks offer lower performance than the iPad. Heck, even take a look at the JooJoo POS; same price as the iPad with lower performance stats and a horrible UI.

The iPad is not the second coming of Jesus, it is however an evolutionary step that is going to be defined by it’s apps. Most complaints I have read are by anti-apple fanboys whom only complain because there’s an apple on the back of the iPad.

For those that complain about not being able to run AutoCAD or other “work” apps on the iPad, well, obviously you just don’t get “it.” In time there will be a lot of work-type applications available, however the iPad is not meant to replace a computer.

Will the next version be better, yes that’s how all for-proffit companies work. Also, it’s not too expensive. I’ve looked at netbooks and unless you pick one up on super sale, you’re not getting two for the price of one iPad.

James Katt April 2, 2010 12:12 AM

I am looking forward to my iPad.

I have over 800 PDF books for it – in color – including scores of 1000 to 3000 page textbooks.

You can’t do that on Kindle.

800 PDF books stores in 32 gigabytes. Amazing.

It is a library of books.

The games are going to be outstanding.

Rob April 2, 2010 12:51 AM

This is one of the more cogent wrap-ups of the iPad I’ve seen today.

While I agree that it’s a real threat to netbooks, I think it represents more of a new category of device, rather than a better take on an existing category. Many people will continue to buy netbooks of various stripes, because they care more for extended functionality than for the user experience. Apple will pick off some of these over time, but that’s not the main market for the iPad.

This is a media consumption device – everything about it speaks to that, and most of the reviewers recognize it. It has a few speedbumps, e.g. Flash, but that doesn’t invalidate its value. It’s a whole new way of interacting with both content and the O/S (taking after the iPhone/iPod, but extending it radically), and it’s going to be a game changer.

fflkjdakl April 2, 2010 3:02 AM

thanks

Jim April 2, 2010 3:48 AM

For the naysayers out there, you’re right the iPad isn’t for you. Don’t buy it. It’s not for everyone. But for those who simply want one because of its unique elegance, like me, go for it. My only internal debate is 32 vrs 64 GBs. When the next better iPad arrives in 6 months to a year and it surely will, I’ll sell this one and buy the new one.

Phil April 2, 2010 4:14 AM

Something a lot of critics and commentators seems to forget is that you can’t get a netbook in this price range with SSD storage.

Someone should do a comparison video opening and closing apps on a netbook and an iPad.

Steve April 2, 2010 10:04 AM

@ tenand20

What’s an iTouch? I’ve never heard of it. Apple certainly doesn’t sell one.

George April 2, 2010 10:58 AM

Perhaps i think over time iPad will actually grow in usefulnes. Consider it could also be a starting point for a new handheld gaming market change.

http://www.financialadvisory.com/article/02-04-2010/the-apple-ipad-could-conquer-the-nintendo-ds-in-handheld-gaming/

Tim April 2, 2010 12:45 PM

I appreciate the review– and even more I appreciate the intent of the review– but count me in that clueless group that simply doesn’t get this device. I was really hoping this review would finally explain it to me, but perhaps I’m too stubborn or too dense to get it.

The ipad strikes me as “macbook minus”. I don’t know why I would need that.

Bryan April 2, 2010 2:34 PM

@TenAnd20: “…I can buy two high-end netbooks for that amount.”

What an oxymoron. There’s no such thing as a “high-end” netbook. And, for the record, the netbook is saddled with Windoze XP and does not feature a touch interface. A netbook has that awful cramped keyboard that’s staring at you everytime you open the device to use it. The beauty of the iPad is that the keyboard is there when you need it, and goes away when you don’t. If you don’t like it… don’t buy it.