Geek specs are dead, because no-one cares (apart from geeks)
Ian Betteridge offers a savvy take on modern computer purchase:
If there’s one thing that the huge demand for netbooks a few years ago proved, it’s that people buy because they can see how a computer can do something for them, not on megahertz.
In the case of netbooks, the “something” was being a machine they could carry everywhere, and do simple stuff on. In the case of Macs, it’s having access to easy to use, powerful software like iPhoto, iMovie, and so on – in a package that’s good looking, well designed, robust, and so on.
This continues through to tablets. There’s a lovely comment I recall reading from a teenager who said they wanted an iPad rather than a netbook, because you could “do more” with the iPad. Geeks would spit out their coffee at such a remark, reel off a tech-specs list, burble on about installing any app, ever (preferably on Linux) and get all huffy about someone buying a tablet, especially one from Apple and its walled garden.
The reality is most people really don’t give a crap about bullet-points. They just want to do things. With the iPad, they see all these adverts that show people making music, finger-painting, creating office documents, playing games, with hugely intuitive interfaces, on a device that’s sleek and shiny. Apple doesn’t need to bang on about the amount of RAM the iPad has, or the A4 chip’s speed—it’s all about what you can do, creatively, productively, or as a consumer. Until the competition figures that out, they’ll have a tough time catching Apple in the tablet space, and also a tricky time stopping Apple from nibbling away at marketshare for laptops and even desktop PCs.
You’re right that specs don’t matter to most people (and probably never did, unless you really are a Tegra 2 loving wife, in which case, hello sailor), but the reason why is interesting. Specs work in isolation from each other: RAM, Ghz, GB, etc; they don’t add up to anything, and can’t tell you anything about the user experience. The specs inside iPad 1, if you were just looking at them compared to a laptop, are lousy, and would be lousy in a laptop expected to run desktop OS X. Apple changed the game by changing what was required of hardware, by rethinking the OS requirements from the ground up, to use as little of the hardware as possible while reimaginging the user experience as well. And while the iPad 2 is improved, I can’t say the iPad 1 ever felt sluggish (note, however, one of the tradeoffs: a reduced product upgrade lifetime, in that the iPhone 3G didn’t take to iOS 4 so well, and the 3GS only a little better; getting two or at most three years of upgradability out of a mobile device seems pretty good, but not acceptable for a desktop or laptop). To say your wife will “love the Tegra 2” is both condescending and wrong: no one will care if the Tegra 2 is still sluggish because the software is bloated (or just bad). No one will care if the iPad 1 has 256MB of RAM, if it feels snappy. Which it does. Of course, the age-old problem of software control remains: a hardware maker, who doesn’t write their own software, can’t make it snappy (which is the thing people really do care about), so they fall back on what they do control, the numbers.
[…] Geek specs are dead, because no-one cares (apart from geeks) […]