As a visual designer, I have to disagree. Trying to work on an iPad is a complete waste of time. Sketching/prototyping by hand is orders of magnitude faster than on an iPad, and it wouldn't even be worth it to try to produce anything resembling deliverable work. The required depth of interaction, breadth of options, and fine-grain control just isn't there.
For musicians, I think it's a different story because the iPad usually augments an existing setup; it can be integrated with other devices to fill a specific need that can be solved by a touch interface into highly customized software. In this case, the iPad is actually allowing totally new interaction that wasn't possible before. This is much more useful than the visual designer's case, where previously established modes of interaction are simulated in an interface they weren't designed for.
I, and quite a few colleagues, find it really good for ideation, and not too shabby for finished work. David Hockney's recent exhibition at the Royal Academy featured iPads heavily. Anecdotal, perhaps. My point was that to say that iPads are just for consumption is wrong.
So much is dependent on the app. It's hard to discuss the iPad without tacitly including the entire associated software ecosystem (without really being conscious of the scope of that oversight).
I agree with your main point, and I have no doubt that as the medium continues to expand, the quality of the software and interaction will also grow.
Just curious, what visual design apps are you using / would you recommend?
Paper from FiftyThree[1] is very good. Omnigraffle is a useful tool to, but pricey. Photoshop for ipad looks promising too. Matt Gemmell recently wrote a blog post about using the iPad from a UX designers point of view[2].
>As a visual designer, I have to disagree. Trying to work on an iPad is a complete waste of time. Sketching/prototyping by hand is orders of magnitude faster than on an iPad, and it wouldn't even be worth it to try to produce anything resembling deliverable work.
YMMV. Other's have no such problems. Not to mention that it can also do wire-framing, it has tons of apps for professional photographers when combined with the camera connection kit (from going through your shoot to check for keepers and apply keywords, to tethered shooting), and when painting or sketching you can export your graphics work in PDF, PNG, layered Tiff and other formats to finish off on your Mac.
>For musicians, I think it's a different story because the iPad usually augments an existing setup
Same thing can be for visual designers/illustrators/information architects/writers etc whatever. Parent said it can be used for creation, not that you have to ONLY use that from zero to finished output.
No, I just said that ONE of his points is YMMV-kind-of-correct. What I'm saying overall is that this doesn't make working with the iPad a "complete waste of time" --it just makes it complementary. Not to mention that people have created works entirely on the iPad too (like several "New Yorker" cover paintings).
I also address this in an other part of my response: "Parent said it can be used for creation, not that you have to ONLY use that from zero to finished output."
It's not lazy and trite. Just because it's simple doesn't mean it's either of those things. The reality is just that simple: Tablets vs PCs really illustrate core competencies in "Lean Back" (consumption) computing and "Lean Forward" (creation) computing, respectively.
The best analogy I've heard is vehicles. Trucks for heavy duty hauling, cars for ease and efficiency. Because of their form factors and feature differences, the utility of each vehicle is unique from the other.
It's almost obvious, if you think about it. Simple, really.
It's trite because it's inevitable that in a discussion about iPads someone will say it and lazy because just a few minutes using your search engine of preference will illustrate that work can easily be accomplished on an iPad, not because it's simple. In fact there should be a Godwin like law around it. Your analogy is a good one though.
There are a number of apps available for iOS for music creation, ranging in complexity from simple synths and virtual drum kits, to quite accomplished sequencers/DAWs (Apple's own garageband is a perfect example). If i remember rightly Damon Alban created the newest Gorillaz album entirely on the ipad [1]
Note: I don't own an ipad, i just lust after all the cool music apps. I wish people would get started creating equivalent apps for android tabs (though i understand there were historical issues with the audio API in android, which i believe were rectified as of ICS)
I've seen professionals use an iPad as a drum sequencer. Not sure which app, but there you go. The audio output is fine, and a touch interface is definitely suitable for certain music applications, especially live performance.
There are several synthesizer apps where you trigger notes and control various parameters using multi-touch on a 2D surface. More expressive than a normal keyboard, more likely to come up with something new and interesting, and cheaper than esoteric MIDI hardware controllers that allow similar things.
As a professional classical singer, I often use the iPad in lieu of sheet music for concerts, and so do my colleagues. It's become rather popular for that use. Check out ForScore if you want to see what a nice music-reader app looks like.
Musicians use the iPad in all kinds of different ways.
This is actually an example of content consumption from the iPad.
As a singer, you're creating music. But you're pulling information from the tablet - not creating content on it. This example actually supports the idea of tablets being optimized for consumption over creation. Content is going from the iPad to you, not vice-versa.
Sorry, but this is a lazy and trite assertion. They are a extremely useful tools for visual designers and musicians for a start.