The Apple iPad has an IPS screen, which apparently stands for Wide Viewing Angle. Take that away and the device becomes less interesting.

Here’s a scenario, based on many true stories:

The family is gathered in the kitchen talking about what movie they want to watch that evening. “What about Up“, suggests Stephanie. Her mother and father—as always—are out of touch and haven’t heard of it. Their daughter rolls her eyes, pulls out her iPod Touch and seconds later the trailer is ready to roll. She hands the iPod to her mother.

Father wants to watch too.

And he can. But to see properly, he has to get so close to his wife that they’re practically making love (in the kitchen; in front of their daughter; which is bad form). The iPhone and iPod Touch screens are not built to be viewed by more than one person at a time. They are too small to stand back from. And with more than one person it is impossible to look at head-on, so the image starts to distort.

I see similar scenarios all the time with people trying to share something on the screen of their mobile phones (and even laptops). Usually what happens is everyone takes turns looking. With a single photograph this isn’t terrible. With videos or several photographs, usually people tire of waiting their turn.

The iPad has a larger screen than a mobile phone of course, which means it can be put down and everyone can watch from further away. But this is a device designed for holding more than one for putting down and standing back from, and that means a wider viewing angle is crucial.

Here’s another scenario:

Grandma is visiting and wants to see some photographs of the grandchildren. Her daughter picks up the iPad from the coffee table (it’s always on standby and ready to go), taps to photographs and opens up an album. Even though she has technophobia and even has trouble operating her new television, Grandma knows how to swipe-gesture to the next picture.

Her granddaughter sits beside her answering “who’s that” type questions and can see because the viewing angle on this screen allows her to without being grandma-kiss-close. Meanwhile, Grandpa is sitting in the armchair opposite; busy resting his eyes.

Grandma starts laughing at something in one of the photographs and Grandpa stirs, coughs and grunts out a “Woz’that?”. Grandma flips over the photograph for him to see. The iPad is now upside down, but the photograph is not because Apple have thought to automatically flip it.

Would the iPad be better and more ’social’ if it had a camera for Skype video calls? Yeah, sure. But most companies would have added that feature and forgot about getting the important details right. Maybe they put in a cheaper screen that looks great but can’t be viewed at an angle. Or perhaps they pick the expensive screen but then don’t think about flipping the photograph. The other company has added more features, but they are a little frustrating to use.

The iPad is the ultimate social device for a very different reason. Yes, it will handle the Facebook stuff and whatever other social network. But this will be social for people who are in the same physical location too. It will be passed back and forth, held up so others can see from across the room, even operated together.

Social without the internet? Yeah, Apple haven’t forgotten about real life. They’re not led by trying to build new innovative devices, with tonnes of features and taking advantage of the latest trends in social networks. They think how the masses could use it and then they obsess over making that experience great. They think through hundreds of scenarios and make sure their technology supports how people behave. Their goal is to make the technology disappear. Far too many tech companies want to make the technology as obvious as possible.

Like every other company, Apple has to make compromises. But they choose a different set of compromises to everyone else. The camera will come later because the camera makes sense to the masses. But it isn’t their priority. Other features won’t get added at all, because Apple have decided it doesn’t fit any experience that an ordinary person would desire.

This frustrates a lot of people. Some of those frustrated people go to Microsoft, Google, Sony, Nokia, Samsung, Asus or wherever. Some, like me, live with it because we like stuff that works really well, hate technology that gets in your way and are willing to follow the Apple vision. And many people don’t have any idea what they want and just enjoy the advantages of the products.

This is what makes Apple a leader.

Yet so many of the vocal people on the Internet tried to predict what Apple would produce. Things that they want. Things that they want NOW! They shout ‘FAIL’ when Apple doesn’t do what they want. For some what they think they want.

These people dream like Microsoft. Or Nokia. Or Sony.

Well Apple doesn’t invent for the vocal minority geek brigade. They don’t feed off the buzz; they create it. They try to change the world by inventing for the masses.

If you want to judge the iPad, you have to judge it from the right angle. Not on its ports, or cameras, or command lines or features or lack of. With Apple people come first, not technology.

Sometimes they fail there too. They just succeed more than most because they try so hard.

I now have two accounts for receiving television over the Internet. One from the BBC; another from Channel 4. At the moment, I think this is pretty cool because it is something that I didn’t have before. It feels like progress.

At some point I’m sure another channel (that I want) will make their service available. That will mean three pieces of software in my taskbar, all doing the same thing; downloading stuff. Two is already too many, so I keep the applications closed most the time.

So far both services suck at making me watch much TV. About once a week (if that) I go looking to see if there are any interesting shows, and often come away empty handed. I’m sure some of their programming is good, but I have no way of knowing. I can’t channel surf because that means downloading an entire show. They don’t even bother to do promo videos. It’s pretty impossible to find new shows.

And if I do find a new show, I can’t subscribe to it. Subscription is a no brainer, but that’s not happening yet.

Also, these services are only available to UK residents, I believe. Just like NBC is only available in the US. The world is the biggest market, so it might make sense to target that one.

Remember why YouTube got popular. It made it easy to talk and share the content with everyone in the entire world.

Of course, these corporations have an engrained business model and contracts that keep them moving slowly. I’m not a fan of big corporations, but we shouldn’t be surprised that they move slowly and are scared of change.

The question is: will they figure it out faster than the smaller brave independents? There’s an opportunity here for smaller companies with little to lose. Maybe some new companies.

Here’s a thought: the channel I watch most often is called Ted.com. My TV guide is Google Reader. Not many shows are listed in my TV guide yet.

edit: aha! Quarterlife may be an early sign. Still no RSS feed though. But very interesting. (Quarterlife website and BBC news story)

1. Find the correct remote control. It’s the one that looks practically the same as the one you’re holding. No, the other one that looks the same.
2. Press and hold the red ‘On’ button for about 3 seconds. No, you’ve gotta hold it down. Yes, that’s it. No, only once. You’ve turned it off again.
3. Okay, press the number for the channel you want. Wait a few seconds for it to register. No, just press it once, you’ve gone to channel 44. Try again, but only press the button once.
4. hmm, it’s not working. Maybe it’s on the video channel. Try pressing AV. It’s in the middle there, near the top. Okay, press AV again. And again. And again.
5. That’s it. We’re in TV mode now. Oh, but we’re in analogue TV mode. We need to put it in digital mode. Try pressing the TV button. It’s the one next to the AV button.
6. Right I think we’re in the correct mode. Let’s try moving to Channel 4.
7. Hmm, BBC One, Two and Three is here. And the 24 Hour News. And some children’s channels. But where the hell is Channel 4?
8. Duh. Pressing the ‘4′ button will obviously bring it up. Try that.
9. No, that didn’t work.
10. Oh, it’s only currently showing the channels we’ve made as favourites. Let’s show all channels. I think the blue button will change that. Okay, press it again. There we go.
11. There it is. Now just scroll to that channel and press enter.
12. Cry.

Next week: How to record a show before the series has finished

Ring ring.

Ring ring.

Ring ring.

“Hello”

“Hello, is that Alan?”

“Yes it is! Hi Grandad. How are you?”

“Oh we’re ever so pleased. We got our new television today. The men from the shop set it all up for us. Really, helpful.”

“Oh good. So you’re happy with it.”

“Yes. It’s a wonderful picture. And we got one of those new CD recorders with it.”

“Great!”

“I was wondering if you could come round and explain how to work it. Me and your nan have a bit of trouble grasping all this new technology at our age.”

No Granddad, it’s not your age.

I’ve just spent the entire afternoon round their house trying to figure this thing out.

To be fair, they want to do complicated things. You know, things like recording their favourite shows and changing the channel.

Yep, it took me about half an hour to figure out how to change the channel. Televisions have beautiful picture quality these days, even without high definition. But what’s the point when it’s so difficult to use?

Right now there are gaping holes in the market for products that are simple to use. Not just for Granddad, but for everyone that would prefer not to spend their vacation time reading instruction manuals.

The only hope I can see on the horizon is, yet again, Apple. The Apple TV is not yet good enough to replace my Grandparent’s complete setup, but I believe it will be in good time.

It would just be nice if someone beat them to it. They need some proper competition.

Maybe Sony are working on something in secret?

Ha, ha, ha, ha

I crack myself up sometimes.

I’ve just made a subtle change to the design of the site. If you look at the comments or the post’s meta information you will see I now explicitly state that the times are in UTC (or Universal Coordinated Time). They always have been in this most wonderful of time zones, but I didn’t tell you before. This meant you knew what time the comment was posted within a range of hours from 1 to 24. In other words, completely pointless.

What an idiot I have been.

Open up the API for developers and innovation takes off in leaps and bounds. Improve the interface and mass adoption will occur.

Programmable Web

Mozilla Firefox gets choice right. On the surface it doesn’t feel like it gives you too many options. It’s clean; it’s simple. The addons are mentioned when you install, but they are not pushed into your face, so the average user can easily ignore them. And still the power user can easily customise it to their hearts content.

My degree is another great example of getting choice right. If I decide I want a named degree I have to elect to take certain units. That keeps me focused, but I also know I have the option of getting a general unnamed degree and I can study what I want. Within each unit, there is a set of things I must study. That keeps me focused, but afterwards I can read around the subject wherever my fancy takes me. It’s flexible in that way, but not so flexible that I find myself off course.

Kathy Sierra writes this about choice:

In the 80’s, the big thing in education was Learner Control. With hypertext tools came CBT programs and learners were finally put in charge of their own paths through material. The learner was empowered! Just one problem: most people pretty much suck at making sound learning decisions, especially when they don’t already know the material. So, the era of more-is-better-for-learner-control was over.

Then in the 90’s — Whoo-Hoo! Interactive Movies! Interactive Television shows! Interactive Fiction! Outside of rare novelties and a few good story-driven games, most of us would rather leave our storytelling to Steven King or Steven Spielberg, thank-you. A huge part of the point of movies and novels is to be swept into another world–a world we do not have any responsibility for.

People love abundent choice, but they don’t like to see too many options at once. If my parents watch a movie they want a small choice to look through because they haven’t heard of most of the films. I, on the other hand, want unlimited choice.

The reason my degree course works so well is the same reason Firefox works well. The default behaviour is to be led by the hand and told exactly what to do. But if that gets frustrating, I can make the decision to go off and explore on my own. How does my course do this? By providing the content in the form of a book. A chapter in a book is typically read from start to finish — from introduction to conclusion. So if I find something particularly interesting, rather than hitting a hyperlink to it I make a note (mental or written) and then continue with the chapter. This way I get things done in a very focused way but I also have that freedom I desire.

Kathy Sierra refers to the middle ground as the canyon of pain. Once you have reached the limitations of a product it becomes frustrating to continue using it, but it also hurts to take on the more advanced product because of the learning curve. Thankfully software can be built so that it is flexible enough to grow with the user.

It can also be flexible according to context. So, for example, we can take time out to set a goal and then it locks us out of changing that goal until a certain time or outcome has been reached.