Yeah, it could be better.

So iOS 4.0 comes with extra added benefit in Spotlight where you can search the web or search Wikipedia if you haven’t found what you’re looking for. But how hard are they gonna collectively slap their foreheads when they realize they could quite nicely put a Search the AppStore item in there?

By far, the most common typo I make on the iPad virtual keyboard is typing an “n” or a “b” instead of a space. So, I end up with a large number of combined words like “combinednwords” or “largebnumber.”

One thing I noticed is a bit different between iPhone OS 3.1 and 3.2 is that 3.2 will auto-correct “thisthing” to “this thing.” Steve Jobs even had an “oops” moment in his iPad introduction which very slyly showcased this. But now, with these typos I mentioned above, it seems like a no-brainer to extend that auto-correction feature to include properly-formed words which are concatenated with a random letter.

In thinking about the iPad, whether I would want one, and if so which version would I buy, I thought of a good idea for added functionality to Maps.app.

When you get ready to go on a trip, you pack your bags and toiletries, and if you’re anything like me, you’ll double-check your iPod (or iPhone) to make sure you’ve got whatever music and videos you’ll want on the trip.

But if you’re going on a road trip, you traditionally needed to get your maps in order, too. These days, I just use my iPhone for the task, but if I were to buy an iPad, I’d definitely like to have the larger, more-easily-scrutinized maps on that huge screen. But what if I decided not to buy the 3G iPad? It’s pretty much useless for maps once you’re out of WiFi range.

So, what if Maps.app were modified to allow caching of a plotted route? Say, you plot your route from point A to point B, and you tap a button labeled “Cache this route.” And the app would show you a progress bar (with cancel button) as it caches all map tiles for all resolutions along the way. And, with any cached route, if you tap on any button that would obliterate the route — say, the Search tab — a modal dialog would ask you if you’re sure you want to clear the cached route.

Maps.app currently does cache a certain amount if information on the fly, but only at the resolutions you’ve already viewed, and only for a certain amount of time (or until the buffer is full, and it has to rotate in new data).

I’m not deluding myself into thinking Apple would ever do this. But it seems to me that the sky is the limit in the software of these devices, and the answer is not necessarily to diversify your product into six unique SKUs. Steve Jobs knows this. It’s one of the first things he fixed when he came back to Apple: reign in the out-of-control number of motherboards, and by extension, products. Now, with the iPad, it does make sense to sell 3G and non-3G versions. But the truth is, I’d imagine at least one of each flavor will be cut from the lineup within six months. And for the people who can’t justify the cost of a 3G model, yet don’t see enough utility in the non-3G model, it really does make sense to add a little more cache-it-offline functionality to the cheaper models. And it could set a good example for the third-party developers to follow suit.

Marco gets it. Read his whole post.

marco:

The tech press loves checklist comparisons. Let’s evaluate the iPhone to see whether it’s a good product:

Sounds like a terrible product. I bet it will fail.

Perhaps the biggest reason to allow multitasking on iPhone OS — for me, at least — is to allow media apps like Pandora or Last.fm to continue playing while you’re messing about in other apps. Honestly, when I try to come up with other reasons to allow multitasking, I have great difficulty coming up with scenarios that can’t (can’t) be solved with push notifications. Of course, the push notification service could potentially be improved to provide greater value and potential, but still: multitasking doesn’t seem to be necessary.

Now, in terms of media apps like Pandora and Last.fm, I got to thinking: would it be possible to introduce a new type of app that is simply a plugin for iPod.app? Imagine, if you will, if Pandora were made available as another listing on the “More…” screen. Start up the streaming from within iPod.app, and you can go play in other apps to your heart’s content. Or, if Last.fm is more your thing, you could stream your music the same way, through the plugin in iPod.app; or, if you want to play your own on-board music, you could turn on scrobbling, which would also continue to happen in the background.

Now, I know this suggestion is a pretty big break from iPhone interface convention. Currently, the iPhone OS and the AppStore are built on the premise of “one app, one icon.” So, my recommendation would mean that, after downloading Pandora to your device, you would not see a new icon on the Springboard. But I do think that this sort of expansion of the core OS could be a very good idea for everyone.

Perhaps it’s just my enthusiasm for the iPad, and the various UI differences that it brings. Largely, this idea came to me when I realized what a waste of space the Pandora app would be on the iPad. I’m quite anxious to see what types of innovation the iPad helps to spur in the iPhone/iPod Touch OS, since they are — at least in some sense — competitors in the market.

It’s what they do. They’re working on computing products that are several years out from production (or even introduction), and not a single person will ever open his or her mouth about it. And honestly, I think that’s a great way to do it. Mystery breeds curiosity, and in Apple’s case, fanaticism. And sometimes it pays off big, but only when they also master the messaging that does get out.

In January 2007, Steve Jobs gave what I believe might be his Magnum Opus in the introduction of the iPhone. Not only was the device simply revolutionary (at the time, against my usual MO, I believed that particular marketing-speak was actually on-point), but the structure of the presentation was absolutely perfect. The flow of the information that Steve presented was really conducive to getting everyone excited, on the edges of their seats, and dying to know more. He set it all up with context. He pointed and laughed at the horribly Photoshopped mockups. He did the quick, teasing reveal of the device he had in his pocket. And then he showed people how to use it, by using it. And narrating. And being fucking excited.

Yesterday, though, the iPad presentation was simply horrible and awkward. It pains me to say it, but as awkward as Phil Schiller has always struck me, Phil’s portion of the presentation was the only bit that got me excited about the iPad. The iWork software was really nicely done (and new!), and Phil was good at describing what he was showing, and his enthusiasm struck me as genuine.

Compare that with Steve Jobs, whose mind seemed to clearly be elsewhere. Now, if rumors are true (and I usually doubt they are), then it’s likely that Steve was hoping to present more/bigger news yesterday, possibly with regard to media services for iPad. But regardless of cause, it seemed clear that Steve was either disappointed, or pissed, or otherwise failing to focus on the awesomeness he held in his hands. Possibly the dumbest thing he could have said, he said several times: “It just all works.” Scott Forstall said the same thing a few times later on.

As some have already noted, Steve’s demonstration of web browsing on iPad just felt like an awkward session of watching Steve Jobs dick around on the web. There wasn’t much in the way of narration, and it felt as if he just forgot we were all there. Compare this with the presentation of the first-ever iPhone, and the contrast is stark. Steve was genuinely excited to show us the multitouch gestures, the new ways to interact, the fancy scrolling and rubber-banding, and the awesome ability to rotate the screen for better viewability. With the iPad? Not only did Steve take for granted that we all know the gestures he was making, but he also didn’t make hardly any allusion to the fact that the super-phenomenally-popular iPhone is this thing’s older sibling.

Now, I know in theory that this should actually be a good thing. When introducing a new style of device that fits in between your mobile phone and your laptop computer, you really have to tread a fine line with the comparisons to either device. Because, on the one hand, you don’t want to knock your other devices because you want people to keep buying them. And on the other hand, for the people who already own both of those other devices, you need to give them a good reason to buy this fancy new dealio.

That’s actually similar to another problem they had: they didn’t compare it enough to the other products in the marketplace. Of course, Apple is usually good like that. They don’t want to bash the Kindle. They didn’t really bash any other competing products when they introduced the iPhone. But what they did do was to look at those devices, and point out the specific ways in which they wanted their new device to stand apart. All they said about the Kindle was that it paved the way, and that they were going to stand on its shoulders. More needed to be said, if for no other reason than to point out who will be in the market for one of these things. Most people who say they won’t buy one are saying it because they don’t see this thing replacing their laptop. This means you’ve failed to tell them why they would want one. The message should have been clearer, especially after years of no messaging at all for this product.

So, the problem — as I see it — is that in reality they didn’t nail it when they really needed to. Steve didn’t nail it. I really think he needed to draw our attention to the fact that the iPad is a much larger and supercharged version of the iPhone, and that simply by nature of its sheer size, it is an extremely different type of platform. Things that could never be done on iPhone can be done on iPad with ease.

Of course, Steve can’t shoulder all the blame for a badly-done presentation. Scott Forstall, whose presentations have usually been well-received, made a pretty bad blunder. In terms of organization of content, the first major demonstration he gave on the iPad was a one-eighth-screen demo of an iPhone app. Really? That’s the first thing you want to show the world on your new device? Usage of 1/8 of the screen? You don’t do that with a “magical” device. You show how truly effing magical it is, and then you follow up by saying “by the way, all of your iPhone apps will run on it right away, so you’ve got a little time to fill the AppStore with awesomeness for iPad. Now, my Pokemans. Let me show you them.”

Everyone points to Steve Jobs as a great presenter, with an innate ability to get you wanting their latest piece of kit. But the truth is, in terms of keynote presentations, the only one I’ve ever gone back and watched multiple times was Macworld January 2007 (iTunes link). I’m hoping, next time they introduce something brand new, that they’ll do a better job of getting me fired up. I know they have it in them.