I agree that average users don't need the kinds of flexibility, programmability, or customizability I usually demand from my computing devices. I accept that I am indeed a vanishing percentage of the computer-savvy population.

I disagree that average users do 2 things. In most cases, yes: people are using email clients and web browsers frequently. However, the distinction in peoples minds isn't on which process or viewing software they're using, it's which interface they're interacting with and the information displayed by that interface. Ask someone which websites they visit, and they'll probably name at least 10 (social networking, calendars, news sites, fan sites, forums, etc.). Ask them what is the difference between the Facebook app and the Facebook web site, and they'll give you a blank look.

The average user 15 years ago may have been limited in the things they use a computer for. This is because technology and bandwidth were very limited, and people's perception of computation devices were as utilitarian and capriciously unreliable tools. We now have amazing, powerful, stable, well-programmed devices that fit in our pockets. And people use them for a ever-widening range of tasks, most of all the average users.

What I see when I look at the iPad is arbitrary limitation. I understand that the device's design is intended to fit the niche of ubiquitous, no-fuss computing where everything is clean, and simple, and doesn't break. There will always, however, be things that it won't be able to do, not because of physical or technical limitation, but because somebody decided that it shouldn't. If I'm going to own a computer for 3+ years, it has to be able to do everything I want it to do right now, and accommodate the innovation and software improvements people come up with in the near future . Anything less I feel like I'm buying a deficient device.