The name is iPad, not iPod

April 23, 2010 — by Sulmaan Hassan and Roy Bisht

When one types in the word “iPad” into Google, one of the first hits is “iPad a disappointment.”

Many people may believe that the iPad has been rather underwhelming; however, the iPad supports all of the demands of the average customer: entertainment, games, videos, mobile e-mail, and wireless Internet. So why is the iPad a disappointment?

There has also been criticism that the iPad is just an oversized iPod Touch, perhaps one best suited for the near-sighted. In fact, the iPad has more memory, iBooks (basically an iTunes version of a bookstore), exclusive iPad-only apps, a bigger screen, and it is also much faster than the old iPod Touch. Even though there are many similarities to the iPod Touch, the differences are obviously much larger than the similarities. To be blunt, it’s more than an “iPod Touch on steroids.”

Sure, there have been Debby Downers on the iPad. Some people are claiming to be completely disappointed by the iPad. Really? By what? Lack of camera? These are the same people that disparaged the original iMac, original 5GB iPod (which originally cost the same as the entry-level iPad) and even the iPhone. But look where they are now.

When Apple designed the iPad, designers created one of the most entertaining devices that the 21st century has seen and will see for a long time. And if that was Apple’s goal when they made the iPad, they have succeeded.

Throughout Apple’s run as one of the top electronic entertainment producers in the world, they have created a successful string of products such as the many iPods, the Mac, the iPhone, Apple TV. All of those products have ended up making Apple one of the most productive companies in the world and entertained millions of people worldwide. Now, it is the iPad’s turn to join that prestigious list and continue the Apple dynasty.