Yes, you read the headline correctly. Apparently in 2001 at a trade show in Germany, LG demoed the “Digital iPAD” a “linux-based web pad”. It came with a blazing fast 206mhz intel SOC and a mammoth 64mb of ram.  It even sported wireless B internet connectivity and expandable storage via a PCMCIA slot. The product was supposed to be shipped 12 months after it was demoed , but never made it market. The world obviously wasn’t quite ready for the iPAD back then. Oh what could have been! 0_o


All jokes aside, its surprising that LG never sued Apple over the naming of their iPad given the “litigate first, innovate later” mentality present in today’s tech world. I also find it funny that the device was slated to have expandable storage and the modern iPad lacks the feature altogether.

For from the original 2001 blog post-

“LG’s new Digital iPad comes with an Integrated Web browser and Linux-based MP3 and MPEG4 players and can connect to the Internet over a wireless 802.11lb LAN that reaches up to 100 meters, according to the company. A spokesman for LG at CeBIT said that the product may come with other connectivity solutions, however, including possibly a “PDA style slot” for mobile phones.

The iPad is powered by a 206Mhz Intel SA-1110 system-on-chip processor and an in-built 64 SDRAM module. It offers some expandability with a slot for Flash memory cards and PCMCIA cards. To operate the devices, users are given a stylus and the pad provides handwriting recognition for both English and Korean.”


SOURCE- Linuxfordevices

  1. This was the brief era of net appliances, of Audrey, the i-Opener (pushed by Circuit City?) and the Virgin Webplayer. They were locked to one service or another and failed. All the devices are a low end hackers delight.

  2. “its surprising that LG never sued Apple over the naming of their iPad”

    Not surprising at all. The LG prototype TabletPC was never produced, and so they never bothered to register the “iPAD” name.

    Apple did register the “iPad” name internationally, even paying a small company for the rights to a similar product name (but they reneged on their contract with Apple, and ended up suing for more money).

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here