I’m installing Windows XP SP3 into a VM, and it’s going to take a while, so figured I’d write up some stuff about the iPad.
First, though, an excerpt from Edward Tufte’s book Visual Explanations. This may be breaking copyright law, and I like the guy and don’t really want to piss him off. That said, forgiveness is easier to ask for than permission, and a picture is worth a thousand words.

The above image is a mockup of a data-rich medical record display designed by Tufte and Seth Powsner. Visual Explanations mentions that the layout and “associated computer program” received a U.S. patent, which means (to me) that there is an implementation of this idea floating around somewhere.
“Somewhere” is the key word, because I haven’t ever seen something like this.
My sample size is admittedly limited, though I think it is larger than what most people experience. At my first job, I built software to track nutritional intake for premature infants. I made regular trips to meet with doctors and nurses for presentations and requirements gathering. A family friend is a nurse at Littleton Adventist’s NICU, and I’ve visited her at work a couple times. My current job involves developing sample management software for Northwestern University’s Lurie Cancer Center, and I visit pathologists and technicians on a biweekly basis.
I have not seen displays of such sophistication in wide use at any of those locations.
That isn’t to say that people haven’t tried. The nutritional intake program I mentioned above, for example, was designed to run on tablet PCs. But it never really worked that way: the program was predominantly used at a traditional desktop computer. (I don’t know if that’s still true, but it was certainly true when I was there.)
There were a few problems. The tablet PCs were too thick to comfortably hold in a hand. Their screens were very low-resolution, running at a very uncomfortable 72ppi or so — a standard screen resolution, but not nearly good enough for prolonged use and carrying. They had exposed connectors and all sorts of miscellania hanging off them. They required a stylus for input. And they were quite slow.
So I’m interested in iPad-like devices because, to me, it seems like it’s the tablet PC refined just a little bit to be useful in settings where you want the connectivity of a modern network computer combined with the portability of a clipboard plus a screen that has the resolution to (A) not be painful to look at and (B) communicate and manipulate lots of data in a single glance.
Tufte’s mockup is just one example of what you can do with an iPad-like device in a medical setting. Something else I’d like to try using an iPad-like device for is to speed up inventory management of samples. Instead of having to shuffle between a desktop computer and a staining station (which is slow), or somehow tweaking the equipment to automatically communicate work details to a central server (would be nice, but just isn’t going to happen), you can have your iPad-like device next to you at the station, write in what you’re going to do, commit that data, and then do your work.
I wrote “iPad-like” because I am not interested in actually developing for the iPad. The $500-per-unit starting cost is a lot to handle on its own, and is definitely the most important factor here; but besides that, Apple’s platforms, as carefully designed as they are, do not interest me because they are not open systems; and I’m so used to open systems that targeting a closed platform like the iPhone OS, OS X, or Windows just feels dirty.
So if someone else out there can build iPad-like hardware (and please pay attention to the fact that Apple has made their system thin and light with long battery life and a good capacitive touchscreen LCD here — slapping in a crappy TN low-resolution panel and some miserable 2-hour battery life will not work!) and load Android, Maemo, or some other reasonably-open-to-fully-free system (on the fully free front: has anyone found a way to get OpenBSD into a form suitable for mobile devices?) onto it, I’d like to see it and play with it. I’m willing to pay a lot for engineering prototypes, though I would like you to offer me a significant volume discount too.
Update: Jay pointed out to me that the iPad has a 9.7" screen at 1024×768. This means (if my math is correct) that the iPad has a 204 ppi screen, which is close to what 10" modern netbooks give you and is 60-70ppi lower than what modern smartphones like Motorola’s Milestone, HTC’s Touch Pro 2, and Nokia’s N900 give you.
Update 2: Actually, the iPad screen is 132 ppi. Whoops.
I have no problems with using styli as input devices, but you have to consider the context of styli use. Styli work in contexts like phones, where you can comfortably hold the device in your palm and poke at it with another hand. They don’t work so well in contexts where you’re holding a US letter paper-sized device to read and poke at, unless you’ve got a desk nearby.
If you’ve seen Avatar, try to recall the scene where Dr. Max Patel moves a program from his desktop workstation to a portable viewing device. I really liked that idea. That has nothing to do with the iPad or any iPad-like devices, but having that sort of flexibility in how, when, and where you view and manipulate data in a laboratory is very, very powerful.
I’m also not impressed enough by Apple hardware or software to consider the tradeoff, having owned two Macbook Pros (one first-gen, one fourth-gen) and not noticing any real difference in build quality or hardware/software WTFs between Apples and other computer brands I have used.
I also have no problems with resistive touchscreens. I recently purchased a Nokia N900 for use as my primary phone and have not had any problems using its resistive touchscreen, either with the included stylus or my finger. But this particular application I’m talking about, I think, will benefit from the lighter pressure demanded by capacitive touchscreens.