Good Will Blogging
How do you like them apples...

Just checking in on my predictions for the third-generation iPad, which was announced today. Here is what I predicted back in January:

• Name: iPad 2S.

Nope. It wasn’t “iPad 2X” as I predicted in my update, either. It seems that Apple is using both “The new iPad” and “the third-generation iPad” in their marketing copy.

This begs the question, what will this iPad be called next year, when the fourth-generation iPad is announced? “The old iPad”?!

Since this is a post about predictions, I may as well go ahead and predict that iPads will start to follow Apple’s convention for iPods and iMacs: a combination of “3rd-generation” and “early 2012”.

• Form factor: Exactly the same as iPad 2.

Not quite. The basic design is exactly the same, but it’s a hair thicker — 0.6mm to be exact. Since the shape and size of the body were really the core prediction I was making, this comes as a big shock to me. Still, the existing Smart Covers and third-party cases will still fit, and I guess Apple didn’t need to do a huge amount of factory retooling.

0.6mm doesn’t sound like a lot, but it is almost a 7% increase. It’s often surprising how good our hands are at picking up subtle differences like that, so we’ll see how insignificant that is in the tech press reviews, I guess.

• Screen: 9.7-inch diagonal; 2048 x 1536 resolution at 264 ppi. (This will qualify as “Retina Display” by way of typical viewing distance.)

Spot on.

By yesterday afternoon, the retina display seemed like a forgone conclusion, with actual parts leaking out of the factories. But it was much less of a sure thing back in January, so I’ll chalk this one up as a win.

• Storage: 32 GB, 64 GB, and 96 GB.

Nuh-uh. This was also surprising. Although it’s in line with the storage increments in the third-generation iPhone, I had expected a bump to help handle the bigger files you will need to make the retina display worthwhile.

• Chip: Next-gen (“A6”?) dual-core SoC; improved graphics.

The chip, as it turns out, is called “A5X”. I got the dual-core and improved graphics right.

• Cameras: At most, a modestly improved rear camera.

Right that it was the rear camera only, but I could hardly call that a modest improvement. That’s a pleasant surprise.

• Software: Siri support; a point upgrade to iOS, probably “5.2”; more iCloud-based features; and at least one new feature that doesn’t work outside the US.

As I noted in my update, the seemingly imminent iOS 5.1 update never came out, so the point upgrade was “5.1” in the end.

I was right about new iCloud features. From the live blogs I followed, it seems like at least:

• Movies added to iTunes in the Cloud
• “Beaming” directly between devices (not sure if this is via iCloud or something more akin to AirDrop)
• Photo Journals

It was surprising and interesting that instead of the full Siri support I predicted, we got just the text dictation feature. I am utterly stumped as to why.

I have to say I’m pleased to see Japanese support for Siri. I am not hopeful that it will work well, though. But that’s a topic for another day.

As for a feature that won’t work outside the US, I didn’t see anything on the software side, but “4G” LTE is pretty hard to find. I’m told that NTT DoCoMo has it here, so it will be interesting to see if they finally cut a deal with Apple this year, to carry the 4G iPad and potential 4G in the next iPhone.

• Release date: 16th March, 2012.

Spot on. Not bad for a prediction 2 months out. Happy to see release date parity in Japan.

• Price: USD $499 for 32 GB WiFi model; $829 for 96 GB WiFi + 3G model.

Correct, except for the storage sizes.

So, I count that as about 5.5 out of 9. Not bad.

Here’s a crazy thought: At some point, I think maybe the iMac will have an all-glass exterior. Maybe the next model.

Here is a visual history of the iMac exterior design since it changed to the current form factor. (All images courtesy apple-history.com.)

iMac, circa 2004:

iMac, circa 2007:

iMac, late 2009–present:

The aluminium “chin” at the bottom is getting smaller, and the aluminium border has disappeared altogether, replaced with edge-to-edge glass. It seems natural to me that the aluminium of the chin will disappear altogether, leaving black glass all the way to the bottom edge (with an Apple logo mirror, like the black iPhone 4/4S).

But it’s also possible that the stand piece and even maybe the back could become glass. Apple has famously honed its skills in high-strength, curved, structural glass, so I don’t think it would be difficult to produce an all-glass stand and hinge that can support the iMac’s weight.

Listening to @siracusa’s podcast, he prescribes an interesting solution to the problem he perceives with OS X moving to a yearly update schedule: Intel’s tick-tock model.

It certainly seems to fit with Apple’s behaviour in recent years.

Exhibit A: iPhone

The iPhone 3G, a big update to the original iPhone, was followed by the relatively modest 3GS. It had an identical external design, and even its name acknowledged that it was intended as a better iPhone 3G.

The next update, iPhone 4, was clearly a “tock” — radically new design, and big improvements across the board. And again we saw the “tick” as iPhone 4S, similar to iPhone 3GS in both the magnitude of changes and the naming. iPhone 4S is an iPhone 4, plus an S. It is the iPhone 4 that has become logistically practical to manufacture in 2011/12.

Exhibit B: iPad

Okay, we haven’t actually seen the third episode in the iPad saga yet, but I’m convinced it will be a “tick” — a refinement on the current iPad 2 design.

Certainly the iPad appears to be following the same pattern as iPhone for its first two designs. We shall see.

Exhibit C: Mac OS X

As Mr Siracusa points out, Snow Leopard was a functionally minor increment over Leopard, as Apple focussed most of its resources on stability, performance, and architectural improvements.

What he didn’t mention, unless I missed it, was that its name was an increment of its predecessor. Just like the iPhone 3GS, just like the iPhone 4GS.

And here we are again, with Mountain Lion. If I’m right, its name intentionally signals a “tick”, meaning it is intended to be a better Lion. If I’m right, we can think of 10.8 as “Lion S”.

From what I’ve seen of it so far, it does appear to be functionally minor. The headline features touted on Apple’s teaser page are almost all existing features of iOS, so really, there isn’t much new design work there. Think back to Snow Leopard — it wasn’t completely devoid of new functionality; there was actually quite a lot. I think Mountain Lion is approximately on par with Snow Leopard in terms of the visible stuff.

All of this is meant to support the case for 10.8 as a big stability and performance release in disguise. Is this wishful thinking?

The next iPad will not be iPad 3. It will be iPad 2S.

Apple has established the pattern already with iPhone: after the original iPhone, there was a significant external hardware design change in the second generation, iPhone 3G. The third generation iPhone retained the exact same external hardware design as the second generation, and got the name “iPhone 3GS”. This was repeated with the new design of iPhone 4, inherited by the iPhone 4S.

The first generation hardware was not repeated, and served almost as a prototype. From the second generation, the hardware design lasts two product cycles — two years.

I would not be the first to speculate that this is related to the costs of manufacturing machinery and processes. Apple sees its competitive lead as being more than 2 years anyway, so why waste resources re-tooling its plants every year?

So far, the iPad seems to be following the same pattern: the second generation got a significant external hardware design change. Apple’s product naming strategy for iPad may differ from iPhone, meaning Apple may choose to name the next iPad “3”, but I predict the external hardware design will be exactly the same as iPad 2.

Note that this does not discount the possibility of a Retina Display. A double-resolution display does not affect the external design. It will certainly require different internals, but I’m only talking about the external design here — both the iPhones 3GS and 4S had huge internal upgrades.

So here are my predictions for the next iPad, just for fun:

• Name: iPad 2S.
• Form factor: Exactly the same as iPad 2.
• Screen: 9.7-inch diagonal; 2048 x 1536 resolution at 264 ppi. (This will qualify as “Retina Display” by way of typical viewing distance.)
• Storage: 32 GB, 64 GB, and 96 GB.
• Chip: Next-gen (“A6”?) dual-core SoC; improved graphics.
• Cameras: At most, a modestly improved rear camera.
• Software: Siri support; a point upgrade to iOS, probably “5.2”; more iCloud-based features; and at least one new feature that doesn’t work outside the US.
• Release date: 16th March, 2012.
• Price: USD $499 for 32 GB WiFi model; $829 for 96 GB WiFi + 3G model.

UPDATE: Since iOS 5.1 still hasn’t been released, I expect it will with the new iPad announcement. Also, it looks like the new chip will be named “A5X”, which leads me to think the name of the new iPad will be “iPad 2X”.

On his podcast with Dan Benjamin The Talk Show, episode #68, John Gruber said, of the way he views the Kindle Fire’s competitive position relative to the iPad:

The Fire is way more interesting, because it’s not an iPad rip-off. I mean, clearly it’s following the path that the iPad blazed in terms of basic form factor, and that the key to tablet computing is touch-based interfaces. It’s not the previous Microsoft style of styluses and full Windows operating system.

He’s right, of course, but what I anticipated him to say was, “The Fire is clearly sailing in the iPad’s wake, but that’s not to say they’re copying iPad.”

The truth is, as everyone knows, Apple didn’t invent the tablet computer. Microsoft didn’t invent it either, but they were the first to bring an actual product to market (AFAIK) with the Windows Tablet PC.

But the Tablet PC didn’t catch on. It didn’t leave a wake for others to follow. To stretch the boating metaphor, it was like a cargo ship scraping its hull on in too-shallow water.

The iPad followed the Tablet PC’s path, but it sails in deeper water — water that wasn’t there before. Apple brought the ocean.

And now the ocean is there, the Kindle Fire has an ocean to sail in. What we haven’t found out yet is, are they another boat in iPad’s wake, or just waterskiers?

Later in the podcast, Gruber makes the point that quite possibly zero people who have bought a Kindle Fire were first-time Amazon customers:

That you can say, ‘Look, if you trust us, and you already have an account with us…’ And I can’t help but think that almost everybody… I mean how many people do you think have bought a Kindle Fire, who didn’t already have an Amazon username and password? I mean, maybe zero! It might literally be zero people who’ve done that.

Thinking about what makes the Kindle Fire the first credible competitor to the iPad, it occurs to me that Amazon and Apple both have an immeasurably valuable asset to their names: millions and millions of credit cards.

Once a company already has your credit card details, it is so much easier for them to get you to give them money. This is obvious, but to finish the point, the user experience of entering credit card and shipping address details is long and painful. You have to type a lot of personal details into the website of a company you just met, and any mistake might mean you don’t get what you want, or worse, lose some money.

To flip it over, the point is that every account they have, with credit card details, is an expression of trust from the customer. Credit Card = Trust. You are already in business together. The asset that both Apple and Amazon have is the trust of millions of people.

And it’s all about trust. Amazon was the first truly successful retailer on the Internet. They basically invented online commerce. They had to invent a lot of the technology that allows us to use credit cards — a hopelessly insecure technology conceived in simpler times — on the new world of the Internet. When it comes to using credit cards online, Amazon brought the ocean.

Apple started building its stockpile of credit card accounts much later than Amazon, with the iTunes Music Store. And they leveraged the trust they had earned from making stuff that “just works” to add more accounts with the App Store. Steve Jobs quoted the number of accounts a few times in keynotes, particularly at WWDC, to encourage developers to write more apps, which sold more iPhones and iPads, which got them still more credit cards. This feedback loop has generated a great foundation for Apple to sell things to people, and it’s probably not even 10% of Amazon’s credit card accounts.

If credit cards are a proxy for trust, or at the very least a gateway for digital commerce, then what other companies have this? Seriously — who else has as many credit cards on file as Amazon and Apple? Nobody, right? Certainly not Google, and probably not PayPal, either.

If you stop and think about that, it implies a potential for almost all digital commerce to go through Amazon and Apple. That’s an incredible prospect. And it’s why I expect Apple to enter the market for ad-hoc payments. Maybe NFC, maybe something like Square, maybe something more like EasyPay, maybe something totally different.

But no company can do that without Trust. So the only question is, will it be Apple or Amazon?