Khoi Vinh published, last week, a damning and severe critique of the current state of magazine iPad apps. Here are a couple of extracts:
My  opinion about iPad-based magazines is that they run counter to how  people use tablets today and, unless something changes, will remain at  odds with the way people will use tablets as the medium matures. They’re  bloated, user-unfriendly and map to a tired pattern of mass media  brands trying vainly to establish beachheads on new platforms without  really understanding the platforms at all.....
Take the recent  release of the iPad app version of The New Yorker. Please. I downloaded  an issue a few weeks ago and greatly enjoyed every single word of every  article that I read (whatever the product experience, the journalism  remains a notch above). But I hated everything else about it: it took  way too long to download, cost me US$4.99 over and above the annual  subscription fee that I already pay for the print edition and, as a  content experience, was an impediment to my normal content consumption  habits. I couldn’t email, blog, tweet or quote from the app, to say  nothing of linking away to other sources — for magazine apps like these,  the world outside is just a rumor to be denied. (My iPad Magazine Stand  Khoi Vinh)
In fact Khoi is pretty gloomy about the prospects for the magazine industry:
The  fact of the matter is that the mode of reading that a magazine  represents is a mode that people are decreasingly interested in, that is  making less and less sense as we forge further into this century, and  that makes almost no sense on a tablet. As usual, these publishers  require users to dive into environments that only negligibly acknowledge  the world outside of their brand, if at all — a problem that’s abetted  and exacerbated by the full-screen, single-window posture of all iPad  software. (My iPad Magazine Stand  Khoi Vinh)
There  are some excellent responses to Khoi's depressing account of the  magazine industry prospects in the comments which his blog has  attracted. The best full-out response that I have seen comes from 
Mike Turro.
Without  a doubt the future of magazines–both as an industry and a publishing  framework–is uncertain. However, to write off the reading experience  provided by a good magazine as a relic of the print world is extremely  shortsighted. When Khoi offhandedly and anecdotally declares “that the  mode of reading that a magazine represents is a mode that people are  decreasingly interested in” he is assuming (though he does give a slight  nod to the contrary) that the current use patterns of the web’s most  emphatic users (also iPad’s early adopters) are an indication of the  eventual use patterns of the population of tablet users as a whole. Khoi  is certainly a smart guy, but it may be a bit early to make that call. (@Khoi Vinh's Beautiful Mistake Mike Turro)
Mike  Turro calls Khoi Vinh's mistake, "beautiful". I am not so sure about  that -- it could be a blunder, attributable to his indigestion through consuming too many unripe apps. It seems to me that 'magazine designers'  are particularly excited and in many cases particularly disappointed by  the possibilities of the iPad, because they have been thinking of the  iPad as a new medium and a new design challenge for their typographic  and layout skills, as though magazine publishers could own or control  the device the way they control paper stocks and printed colour choices.  But the iPad is not the medium but a digital device. Magazines will  grow and change as they work out the potential of digital media, but  they start this adventure the way they are. That is nothing to be  ashamed or worried about. The excellence and remarkable quality of the  iPad is that it is really a very 'neutral' digital enabler and any  virtual, digital, media object should be able to thrive in its embrace.  We should not be designing magazines (newspapers, books, films) 
for the iPad but 
for their audience,  an audience that is increasingly digital  and which will now have Galaxies and Droids as well as iPhones  and iPads, and this means we should now be designing digital resources  which can gracefully leap into different devices and across various  media platforms. So if there is a reason for sticking to proven formats (pages, paragraphs, layouts, inserts, wrap-arounds, even belly bands and overlays, indices, cartoons, charts and tables) this is not because these formats are inherently digital, they are not, the reason for sticking with them is that the users/readers understand and enjoy this traditional 'grammar' of type. Too many of the magazine apps that we have seen for the  iPad have been designed and engineered precisely for the iPad in a way  that will make them impossible to deliver for the iPhone or the  successful Android tablet which will surely appear in the next 6/9  months. A publisher or designer who crafts their magazine app  specifically for the iPad is building in obsolescence and writing in 
tablets of stone  a message that should be digital, transferable and evolving. The  challenge which the iPad and other digital manifestations of the  magazine will present to the publisher is this: how can we make a  magazine that works well in print and in a range virtual manifestation  on tablets, games consols and many other digital gadgets that we have  not even considered yet? As Khoi Vinh and Mike Turro both recognise,  this is very early days for the iPad and for tablet apps.
The  requirement that a magazine should be consistent across a variety of  print and digital manifestations certainly does not mean that it should  be 
the same in those 'editions'; if, to take a specific and local example, you look at Exact Editions apps you will find that there is stuff that you can do with them on the web that you cannot do with them on the iPad, there is stuff that you can do with them on the iPhone that you cannot do on the iPad and there is plenty that you can do with them on the iPad that you cannot do on the web versions. The various digital forms of a magazine will be different from each other  but they should have a common core; and a clever designer will make sure  that a 21st Century magazine not only looks good in print, but also in  its many digital variants where additional layers of interactivity and  sociability will certainly accrue. I have been struck by the insistence  with which the readers who subscribe to the magazine we support with  apps and digital editions want the app to reflect and to represent the  magazine that they know. They expect it to be on the iPad and they do  not expect it to be something completely different from the magazine  they may have been loyally reading for a decade and more.