Now that the iPad announcement is behind us, it’s worth taking a closer look at some of the recent happenings surrounding the iPad rollout.

The iPad was criticized by quite a few industry folk – including those who are generally pro-Apple – for its shortcomings: lack of integrated USB and memory card reader, no built-in webcam, lack of multitasking and no support of Adobe Flash. In essence, the iPad is a big iPod Touch.

I think a much bigger deal than any of those hardware issues is the app store. Here’s a device that’s priced within striking distance of Netbook territory, yet you’ll only be able to get apps approved by Apple, through Apple’s own app store. I suppose at some point someone will jailbreak the iPad, but that’s something only a few users will ever attempt. Heck, more users will root their Android phones than ever jailbreak an iPad.

This touches on a larger issue that seems to be gathering momentum around the industry.

Here are some of the arguments against overclocking: “It voids the warranty. It stresses the system components beyond their specifications, sometimes to the point of premature death. It requires additional expenditures of power and cooling—and if you screw it up, you can fry your processor.”

And here is the biggest case for overclocking: “It makes my computer run faster.”

Both of those positions are valid. And most folks who have experience in overclocking are well aware of the ones and the zeroes in the equation. But neither of those assertions is compelling enough to end the argument one way or the other—because both of those positions fall short of the real issue.

Thirty-five years ago, Douglas Trumbull, the special effects wizard who created marvelous spaceships for Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey and not-so marvelous spaceships for Gene Roddenberry’s Star Trek: The Motionless Picture also worked on a process called Showscan.

Showscan used 70mm film projected onto a screen that curved 150 degrees around the audience—exactly like the Cinerama screens of the 50’s and 60’s. The difference between Showscan and 70mm Cinerama was that Showscan was photographed and projected at 72 frames per second. The impact on viewers was profound. The image was so clear it looked three-dimensional. All film grain disappeared. If there was dirt on the film, it wasn’t on the screen long enough to register. All that was left was the image. Even better, fast moving objects didn’t flicker, didn’t blur, didn’t shudder—they just moved smoothly. The inevitable roller-coaster demonstration was visceral.

Trumbull tested the Showscan process in front of several live audiences; he also had researchers from UCLA come in and measure the physical reactions of Showscan viewers.

What they found directly influenced the direction of home theater technology.