To say opinion is divided on Steve Jobs' new creation is putting it mildly. From the tags of "iLetdown" (and some rather less savory nicknames) to cries of "it's just a big iPhone", and complaints about the lack of multitasking - online reaction to the iPad is one of distinct anti-climax.
Perhaps that's to be expected, and anyway, it's not as if blame can be laid at the feet of Apple itself, which has hardly been doing much to directly stoke the pre-launch hype (if anything, it's the media that can be blamed for this).
Perhaps the biggest criticism of the iPad is that, for all the incredible design (the body is only a tad thicker than an iPhone, and weighs less than a kilogram) it just doesn't do anything that a laptop already can't do.
Add to this the lack of key features like a built-in camera, multitasking, no flash (meaning key streaming video sites will be off-limits), and an arguably expensive asking price which could possibly reach the $1,000 (though this is speculation), and your enthusiasm for adding almost a 10in sized sheet of glass to your backpack or suitcase might rapidly fall away.
On the other hand, all of these arguments could be said to be missing the bigger point here - Apple has introduced a device that takes one of the best things about a laptop (the large screen), and one of the best things about the iPhone (the mass of simple, useful apps) and bundled them together. The combination is a device that's suddenly much better than the iPhone for browsing the Web, and less bulky than a laptop.
So is the iPad really all it's cracked up to be? I tend to agree with some comments that the iPad is expensive, but in the interests of healthy debate, let's look at the other side of the coin, and some of the major criticisms.
It's just a big iPhone
Well, yes, that's the point. Aside from Mac OS X, what is the alternative - tablets running full versions of Windows? There's no doubt that Windows 7, Android and maybe even Mac OS X might make fine operating systems for a tablet, but there's no getting away from the fact that they're more complicated to navigate, and involve small, fiddly interface elements. The iPhone OS was built for fumbling fingers, rather than touch being an additional feature.
My laptop can do all of this
Wait a minute...lots of people seem to love the Kindle, but can't get their heads around the iPad, which is everything the Kindle does, and more. The problem is that people are comparing the iPad to a laptop, when it's the Kindle they should really be comparing it to.
The fact is, tablets are easier to use in confined spaces. Even several years ago, with a far clunkier version of Windows, and a physical keyboard attached, it was obvious that tablets had huge potential - they're just easier to use in cramped quarters without a keyboard flapping around (like the Kindle). Only this time round, the iPad doesn't have a clunky keyboard, and it's thinner and lighter than just about any laptop you'll ever see.
Why would I take a laptop with a clunky keyboard, and a thicker, heavier design, when I could have the screen only? For Web, ebooks, email, and video, why can't the iPad do the job? That said, I think this is probably the biggest hurdle Apple will have in convincing people that they need an iPad.
It will kill the Kindle
Maybe. The lack of e-ink doesn't seem to have hindered readability - in fact, by all reports (granted, very brief hands-on impressions from the launch event), readability on the iPad is even better than the Kindle. Add the element of colour, and the Kindle is suddenly looking severely limited. Interestingly, at CES this year it was clear that ebook manufacturers have realised this is a problem - I saw several dual screen ebook readers that tried to cram a second colour LCD alongside the black and white e-ink screen. The result looked clunky, and a poor cousin to the iPad configuration. And, Amazon has pointed out that Kindle ebooks can be read on the iPad anyway. The Kindle is still an excellent device, but it will be interesting to see whether colour and other apps are in its future.
No-one's buying tablets anyway
This argument has been doing the rounds for a decade. Three things could change the game for tablets. One: 3G wireless broadband means access to streaming video, email. Two: ebooks (and "emagazines", is that the correct term?) look like being an incredibly handy way to browse the daily paper over a cup of coffee or on your morning train/bus trip. Most of the tablets we've see up till now did not come with services like the iBookstore built in. Three: people are probably finally comfortable with ditching their keyboards (a psychological hurdle that the iPhone has no doubt alleviated).
Why would I want a third device?
You wouldn't. For road warriors lugging 15inch portables, and 250GB hard drives full of Excel files and CRM databases, this won't replace anything. For daily commuters wanting web, email and video, this replaces your laptop.