Steve Jobs’ – or should I say Jony’s, Apple designer Jonathan Ive’s – long-awaited tablet device (April/May 2010 delivery – tune into the launch event in QuickTime and MPEG-4 here) has been much hyped as something we’ll use to read our books and papers on.

This may happen – The Economist takes a positive stance; it may not, especially if Fujitsu has anything to do with it. The Japanese company holds an iPad trademark. The jury’s out on whether the tablet’s screen is up to the job (no pun intended). And for some, the iPad’s price is lower than expected. This may discourage other suppliers from launching their own and scupper the market before it’s had a chance to take off.

The technical cognoscenti will no doubt be whining about the lack of a camera, support for Flash and Java, adequate battery life, etc, etc. Whether it’s the new ‘I want’, or the new ‘I can do without’. If you’re a woman, you’ll think the former – watch this very funny YouTube take from the US. And another, slightly longer but in my view even funnier take using Adolph H.

If you really want to understand where Apple’s going with iPad, ask Apple Meister Alan Kay. The real point is: Apple’s iPad is more than an iPhone with go-faster stripes on the side.

It represents refinement – of features, of use. It isn’t a revolutionary product, but a supremely evolutionary one. The epitome of product design and the nearest thing we have to a ’rounded’ computer that has to pay its way alongside a best-selling phone and music/film player.

Or, if you’re Apple fan and UK telly treasure, Mr Stephen Fry (bless ‘im):

“It’s transcendentally smooth and fast. It’s astounding. God, it’s beautiful. The display is stunning. I’m drooling with anticipation.”