iPad, therefore iAm

The iPad is here, and recess hasn’t been this underwhelmed since Scarlett Johansson tried to sing.

As far as I can tell, the iPad is like a laptop that does less. You can read newspapers, magazines and books on it, but Apple still hasn’t proven why this is any better than reading these things in print. And yes, five of the major book publishers are on board and have agreed to start distributing their e-books through a new iTunes-like store, called iMazon (just kidding—it’s called iBooks. Shocking). But there’s still a reason you don’t know anyone who owns a Kindle, and Apple’s actually going to charge more for their e-books.

So, what’s changed in the media world with this earth-shattering announcement? Seriously, this isn’t a rhetorical question. If you figure it out, let me know. Because all I see is an iPod with words and pictures instead of music, and this time, the iPod’s already been invented.

It seems as though the electronics industry has been the shark circling print for years now, and they still can’t figure out how to pull the publishers under. Maybe this is because print is actually a boat, or even the shore: it’s unsinkable. The public remains unconvinced that there’s any reason to carry around a book/magazine-sized device to read books and magazines on when you could just get a book or magazine. There’s still no library equivalent for the e-book industry. And, most importantly, these things are expensive as hell. Considering Apple’s track record, I don’t see the iPad bucking that trend.

Or maybe this is just the bitter complaint from a newspaper. That’s what the technocrats keep saying, and I don’t buy it. Writers will always be necessary, whether they’re being read on a little digital screen, printed in ink on the remains of a tree or transmitted straight into your brain, bypassing your eyes altogether (eyes are so last decade). That is, until Apple makes the iPerson and we’re replaced by an app. Then I’d be impressed.