But the iTunes [Music] Store—the solution to "The market wants to get music from the internet legally and they want to do it simply"—wasn't launched until a full year and a half after the introduction of the iPod.
I wonder if the timing (iPod a year earlier than iTunes Music Store) wasn't just one of the kind of things that happen when you manage huge things - in that case two huge things. Usually, no matter how much you consult and plan, a huge project has a good chance of not being quite the same as the vision, not ending with quite the planned cost, and possibly finished on a different date than planned.
With the iPod and iTunes the perfect result would have been a simultaneous release and, for all we know, that's what Apple wanted. However, they had much more control over the deadlines for the iPod than they would have had for iTunes (negotiations with third parties for content) and so the latter was forced to later.
Meanwhile they had an iPod ready, and an expectant market, so were forced to "get it out there" knowing they'll take a lot of flak. That also is something that happens when managing - sometimes you have to make a decision that you know will make people question your sanity and, although you know there is a logical answer, you just can't say anything. Do you recall if Jobs looked like he might have been biting his lip back then?
However, I speculate....and I guess we won't know for sure until somebody writes the "Behind the Scenes at iPod" book. I wonder if it'll only be released on iPad.
As for the reading experience, I think there's a distinction to be made between the iPad and devices such as the Kindle which use e-ink technology. Any "brilliant" display is likely to be hard on the eyes when reading for an extended period of time, but the Kindle and other dedicated e-readers don't employ such displays. Would you disqualify those as well?
Or are you saying the "form factor" of a flat-screen-display housed in a rigid body—however thin and light—doesn't comport with your sense of the novel-reading experience? I'm inclined to agree with you in specific regard to lengthy books.
It's more about the preference for holding a book than holding a rigid device with a screen and I'm not including the books (art, photography, et cetera) for which page size and paper stock are a part of the experience. Heck, I don't even want to look through my Don Martin Collection on anything other than the same layout as the original Mad. Sklorkle!! Thwak!! But, I digress.
If I take a paperback to the park I can fold a page corner and stick it in my pocket when I leave. And, I'm not going to worry too much if I forget it on a picnic table. If I'm reading on the deck and nod off, I'm not concerned that the paperback might slide off my lap.
I see Hal Itosis also wondered if I meant screen brightness and, although that's not the issue, he does make an excellent point about a market that wants and needs this kind of device just to be able to have the pleasure of reading.
ryck
